Tax Administration: Comparison of the Reported Tax Liabilities of Foreign- and U.S.-Controlled Corporations, 1996-2000
Published: 2004-02-27T00:00:00

Fast Facts:

Highlights:
section_title: Why GAO Did This Study
paragraphs: In prior reports, GAO found differences in the percentages of foreign-controlled corporations (FCC) and U.S.-controlled corporations (USCC) reporting no tax liability. Based on concerns that FCCs could be avoiding taxes by improperly shifting income to lower tax countries, GAO was asked to compare, for the years 1996 through 2000, (1) FCCs and USCCs, based on the tax liabilities they reported on their U.S. income tax returns--including the percentages reporting zero liabilities--and (2) the differences in FCCs and USCCs in terms of age and industry concentration and the extent to which these differences might explain tax reporting patterns. The report provides information separately for large corporations--those with at least $250 million in assets or $50 million in gross receipts--because, while they account for only 1 percent of all corporations, they own over 93 percent of all assets reported on corporate returns.
section_title: What GAO Found
paragraphs: Comparisons of the tax liabilities of FCCs and USCCs from 1996 to 2000 varied depending on the measure. A majority of all corporations reported no tax liabilities during these years, with a higher percentage of FCCs doing so than USCCs. However, the results were reversed for large corporations. A higher percentage of USCCs than FCCs reported tax liabilities of less than 5 percent of their total income, with similar results for large corporations. FCCs reported a lower amount of tax liability per $1,000 in gross receipts than USCCs. The relationship was similar for large corporations. FCCs and USCCs differ with respect to their age and industry concentrations. A greater percentage of FCCs than USCCs were new--incorporated for less than 3 years. FCCs were more concentrated in wholesale trade and financial services while USCC were more concentrated in nonfinancial services. Large FCCs and USCCs also differed in their age and industry concentrations. Age and industry concentration have been cited as possible explanations for the differences in tax liabilities reported by FCCs and USCCs. However, after controlling for age and industry concentration using a simple statistical model, the differences in taxes reported by FCCs and USCCs were not fully explained by these factors.

section_title: Letter
paragraphs: In response to congressional requests, we have previously reported on the  tax liabilities reported by foreign- and U.S.-controlled corporations. Most  recently, in March 1999, we reported on differences in the percentages of  foreign-controlled corporations (FCC) and U.S.-controlled corporations  (USCC) reporting no income tax liability. We found that for each year from  1989 through 1995, FCCs were more likely to report zero tax liability than  USCCs, though for large corporations the distinction was not as clear-cut.  We said that transfer pricing abuses and other factors such as age and  industry concentration of corporations were possible explanations for the  differences in the percentages of FCCs and USCCs reporting zero tax  liabilities.
You asked us to update our 1999 report. For the years 1996 through 2000  (the last year with data available), we agreed to compare (1) FCCs and  USCCs based on the tax liabilities they reported on their U.S. income tax  returns—including the percentages reporting zero liabilities—and (2) the  differences in FCCs and USCCs in terms of age and industry concentration  and the extent to which these differences might explain tax reporting  patterns.
To meet these objectives, we analyzed data from the Internal Revenue  Service’s (IRS) Statistics of Income (SOI) samples of corporate tax returns  for tax years 1996 through 2000. These samples were based on returns as  filed and did not reflect IRS audit results or any net operating loss  carrybacks from future years. The statistics in the report are estimates  based on the SOI sample. Sampling errors are reported in appendix I.  Caution should be used when comparing estimates because not all  differences between estimates are statistically significant. We also used  statistical modeling to estimate the likelihood of FCCs and USCCs  reporting little or no U.S. income tax liability, holding age and industry  sector constant. We report separately for large corporations—those with at  least $250 million in assets or $50 million in gross receipts—because, while  they account for only 1 percent of all corporations, they make up over 93  percent of all assets reported on corporate returns. We did not attempt to  determine whether corporations were abusing transfer prices.
subsections: section_title: Background
paragraphs: In prior reports, we found that a higher percentage of FCCs than USCCs  reported no U.S. income tax from 1987 through 1995. Some of the reasons  why FCCs and USCCs may not report U.S. income tax include current-year  operating losses, losses carried forward from preceding tax years,  sufficient tax credits available to offset tax liabilities, and improper pricing  of intercompany transactions. Any company that has a related company  with which it transacts business needs to establish transfer prices for those  intercompany transactions. The pricing of intercompany transactions  affects the distribution of profits and ultimately the taxable income of the  companies. Transfer pricing abuse occurs when income and expenses are  improperly allocated among interrelated companies for the purpose of  reducing taxable income in a high-tax jurisdiction.
As we noted in our two earlier reports, researchers have attempted to  explain why FCCs report lower tax liabilities than USCCs. Generally, the  research has recognized that some of the nontax characteristics of firms,  such as age and industry classification, may explain some of the  differences in reported tax liabilities. At the same time, researchers have  acknowledged that transfer pricing abuses may explain some of the  differences, but they have not been able to determine the extent to which  transfer pricing abuses explain the differences in the taxes reported by  FCCs and USCCs.
For the purposes of this report, an FCC is either a foreign corporation or a  U.S. corporation with 50 percent or more of its voting stock owned by a  foreign person or entity. Foreign ownership or control of a U.S. corporation  exists when a foreign investor gains control of an existing U.S. company or  creates a new company and incorporates it in the United States. Both FCCs  and USCCs are subject to U.S. income tax laws although the tax treatment  of some income may differ.
section_title: Scope and Methodology
paragraphs: For both of our objectives, we used data from IRS’s SOI files on corporate  tax returns for 1996 through 2000 to make estimates for the population of  FCCs and USCCs. The SOI corporation data we used for our analyses  included all types of corporations except for subchapter S corporations,  which are treated similarly to partnerships for federal income tax  purposes. The SOI data in this report are based on SOI’s probability sample  of corporate tax returns and thus are subject to some imprecision owing to  sampling variability. Using SOI’s sampling weights, we estimated sampling  errors for our estimates, which are reported in appendix I. Caution should  be used when comparing estimates because not all differences between  estimates are statistically significant. Differences between all FCCs and  USCCs, between FCCs and USCCs reporting no tax liability, between large  FCCs and USCCs, and between large FCCs and USCCs reporting no tax  liability are statistically significant unless noted at the bottom of each  figure or table. To ensure that the data were comparable across years, we  converted all dollar-based data to 2000 dollars. These data included tax  liabilities, total income, gross receipts, assets, cost of goods sold, interest,  and purchases reported.
SOI is a data set widely used for research purposes. IRS performs a number  quality control steps to verify the internal consistency of SOI sample data.  For example, it performs computerized tests to verify the relationships  between values on the returns selected as part of the SOI sample, and  manually edits data items to correct for problems, such as missing items.  We conducted several reliability tests to ensure that the data excerpts we  used for this report were complete and accurate. For example, we  electronically tested the data and used published data as a comparison to  ensure that the data set was complete. To ensure accuracy, we reviewed  related documentation and electronically tested for obvious errors. We  concluded that the data were sufficiently reliable for the purposes of this  report.
To compare FCCs and USCCs based on the tax liabilities they reported on  their U.S. income tax returns, we made estimates for a variety of measures  of tax liability.
We also used SOI data to analyze differences in FCCs and USCCs by age  and industry sector, the same factors we used in the 1999 report. We  defined new corporations as those for which income tax returns showed  incorporation dates within 3 years of the tax year date; all others were  considered old corporations. For example, for tax year 2000, new  corporations are those with incorporation dates no earlier than 1998. Next,  we used a simple logistic regression model to estimate the likelihood of  FCCs and USCCs reporting no tax liability or less than 5 percent in tax  liability relative to total income, after controlling for age and industry  sector. We also used the model to compare large FCCs and USCCs— corporations with at least $250 million in assets or $50 million in gross  receipts. The simple model allowed us to compare FCCs and USCCs while  holding age and industry constant. Our simple model did not control for  other possible influences. For a further explanation of the regression  model, see appendix II.
We requested comments on a draft of this report from the Commissioner of  Internal Revenue. We conducted our review from July 2003 through  February 2004 in accordance with generally accepted government auditing  standards.
section_title: Comparisons of the Tax Liabilities of FCCs and USCCs Depend on the Measure Used
paragraphs: Comparisons of the tax liabilities of FCCs and USCCs vary and depend  upon the measure used. Our comparisons highlight three measures: (1) the  percentage of corporations reporting no tax liability, (2) the percentage of  corporations reporting tax liabilities less than 5 percent of their total  income, and (3) reported tax liabilities per $1,000 of gross receipts. The  first and third measures were highlighted in our 1999 report. We added the  second measure to provide more information about corporations reporting  little or no tax liability.
subsections: section_title: A Higher Percentage of FCCs Than USCCs Reported No Tax Liabilities
paragraphs: Similar to our 1999 report, a majority of corporations, both FCCs and  USCCs, reported no tax liability from 1996 through 2000. During this time,  there was a higher percentage of FCCs compared with USCCs that reported  no tax liability. Overall, an estimated average of 71 percent of FCCs and 61  percent of USCCs reported no tax liability during this period. (See fig. 1 and  table 4 in app. I.)
However, among large corporations, which owned a majority of assets  reported by all corporations, the results were reversed. A higher  percentage of large USCCs compared to large FCCs reported no tax  liability during the same period. (See fig. 1 and table 6 in app. I.)
section_title: A Larger Percentage of USCCs Than FCCs Reported Tax Liabilities of Less Than 5 Percent of Total Income
paragraphs: For each year from 1996 through 2000, a higher percentage of USCCs than  FCCs reported tax liability of less than 5 percent of their total income. For  example, in 2000, an estimated 94 percent of USCCs and 89 percent of  FCCs reported less than 5 percent in tax liability. The relationship was the  same for large corporations. In 2000, an estimated 82 percent of large  USCCs and 76 percent of large FCCs reported tax liability of less than 5  percent of their income. (See fig. 2 and tables 5 and 6 in app. I.)
section_title: FCCs Reported Less Tax Liability Relative to Gross Receipts Than USCCs
paragraphs: FCCs reported less tax liability as a percentage of gross receipts than  USCCs. Overall, in 2000, FCCs reported an estimated $11.88 in tax liability  per $1,000 in gross receipts compared with an estimated $14.75 reported by  USCCs. (See table 1.) Among large corporations, FCCs also reported less  tax liability relative to gross receipts than USCCs. These data were  consistent across all years in the reporting period for both all corporations  and for large corporations. (See table 7 in app. I.) Another way of  comparing tax liabilities is by the percentage of corporations reporting a  tax liability below an arbitrary amount. For example, in 2000, an estimated  92 percent of all FCCs and an estimated 98 percent of all USCCs reported  less than $100,000 in tax liability. The percentages were not as high for  large corporations: an estimated 46 percent of large FCCs and 53 percent of  large USCCs reported less than $100,000 in tax liability. (See tables 8 and 9  in app. I.)
section_title: Age and Industry Concentration May Explain Some Differences in FCCs and USCCs Reporting No or Little Tax Liability
paragraphs: FCCs and USCCs differ in terms of age and industry concentration. These  factors could possibly explain some of the differences in the tax liabilities  reported by FCCs and USCCs. However, when we used a simple statistical  model to control for age and industry sector, differences remained in the  percentages of FCCs and USCCs reporting no or little tax liability.
subsections: section_title: A Larger Percentage of FCCs Were New Compared to USCCs
paragraphs: For every year from 1996 through 2000, a greater estimated percentage of  FCCs compared to USCCs were new (incorporated for 3 years or less).  New firms may have greater expenses relative to receipts and, therefore,  lower taxable income. Among corporations reporting no tax liability, the  differences in age between FCCs and USCCs were not always statistically  significant. (See fig. 3 and table 11 in app. I.)
When comparing large corporations, the percentage that was new was also  higher for large FCCs than USCCs. Among large corporations reporting no  tax liability, a larger percentage of FCCs were new compared with USCCs.  However, not all the differences were statistically significant. (See fig. 4  and table 12 in app. I.)
section_title: FCCs and USCCs Were Concentrated in Different Industries
paragraphs: FCCs and USCCs differed in their concentration among industries. In 2000,  FCCs were more concentrated in the wholesale trade and financial services  industries while USCCs were more concentrated in the nonfinancial  services industry. Industry concentration did not change much when  looking at only corporations reporting no tax liability. (See table 2.)
The concentration across industries did not vary much from year to year  during the reporting period. (See tables 13 and 14 in app. I for year-to-year  comparison.)
In 2000, all large FCCs and large FCCs reporting no tax liability were  concentrated in the wholesale trade and manufacturing sector. In contrast,  large USCCs were concentrated in the financial services industry. (See  table 3.) The distribution of large FCCs and USCCs among industry sectors  across the years 1996 through 1999 reflects that of 2000. (See tables 15 and  16 in app. I.)
Differences in cost ratios across industries are possible explanations for  why industry concentration might affect the reported tax liabilities of FCCs  and USCCs. Cost differences could affect profits and thus tax liabilities.  For example, higher cost of goods sold relative to receipts could contribute  to lower taxable income relative to receipts and, consequently, to lower tax  liability relative to receipts. Tables 19 and 20 in appendix I show several  types of cost ratios by major industry groups for 2000.
section_title: After Controlling for Age and Industry, Differences Remained in FCCs and USCCs
paragraphs: After controlling for age and industry concentration, we estimate that all  FCCs remained more likely than all USCCs to have reported no tax liability  from 1996 through 2000. However, consistent with our earlier comparisons,  all FCCs were significantly less likely than all USCCs to have reported tax  liabilities of less than 5 percent of their total incomes, after controlling for  the same factors. For an explanation of the simple statistical model used to  control for age and industry concentration or for details of the regression  results, see appendix II.
For large corporations, estimated differences in tax liabilities between  FCCs and USSCs after controlling for age and industry were generally  smaller than the comparisons without controlling for these two factors.  These results imply that age and industry may explain some of the  differences between large FCCs and large USCCs in reporting no tax  liability or less than 5 percent of tax liability relative to total income. As  reported in the earlier in this report, large FCCs were in all years less likely  than large USCCs to report no tax liability or less than 5 percent in tax  liability. After controlling for age and industry concentration, there are less  systematic differences between FCCs and USCCs in their likelihood of  reporting either no tax liability or tax liability of less than 5 percent.
section_title: Agency Comments
paragraphs: We provided a draft of this report to the IRS for its comments. On   February 18, IRS provided comments via e-mail on technical issues, which  we incorporated into this report where appropriate.
As arranged with your offices, unless you publicly announce its contents  earlier, we plan no further distribution of this report until 30 days after its  date. At that time, we will then send copies to the Commissioner of Internal  Revenue and other interested parties. We will also make copies available to  others on request. In addition, this report will be available at no charge on  GAO’s Web site at http://www.gao.gov.
If you have any questions concerning this report, please contact me at (202)  512-9110 or at whitej@gao.gov or Ralph Block at (415) 904-2150. Key  contributors to this report are listed in appendix III.
section_title: Additional Tables
paragraphs: The tables in this statistical appendix supplement those in the letter. All the  data were obtained from Internal Revenue Service’s (IRS) Statistics of  Income (SOI) corporate data samples for tax years 1996 through 2000. The  tables in this appendix provide population estimates. After each table,  notes indicate the sampling errors. We are confident the true estimates  would be within these percentage points in 95 out of every 100 samples.  Finally, we conducted tests to determine if there were significant  differences between all FCCs and USCCs, between FCCs and USCCs  reporting no tax liability, between large FCCs and USCCs, and between  large FCCs and USCCs reporting no tax liability. The comparisons that  were not statistically significant are noted in each table.
section_title: Statistical Analysis Using Logistic Regression
paragraphs: We used the SOI data from IRS’s sample of corporate tax returns to  estimate the differences between FCCs and USCCs in reporting no U.S.  income tax liability or tax liability of less than 5 percent relative to total  income. We looked at all of the corporations and separately at large  corporations in each tax year from 1996 through 2000, and calculated odds  ratios to estimate the difference between FCCs and USCCs. We used  USCCs as the reference category in our calculations, so the odds ratios  indicate how much more likely (when the ratios exceed 1.0) or less likely  (when they are less than 1.0) the odds were of FCCs reporting to have no  tax liability or tax liability of less than 5 percent compared with USCCs. We  show these odds ratios in the tables 21 and 22 both before and after  adjusting them to control for the age and industry sector of each  corporation. While the unadjusted odds ratios can be derived directly from  the unadjusted odds shown in these tables, the adjusted odds ratios are  from logistic regression models that were used in each year to estimate the  difference between FCCs and USSCs after the controls for age and industry  sector were introduced. The following explains how odds ratios are  calculated and elaborates on the tables in this appendix.
The odds on whether FCCs and USCCs report no tax liability or tax liability  less than 5 percent are somewhat different from, but related to, the  percentage of each type of corporation reporting no tax liability or tax  liability of less than 5 percent. The odds of reporting no tax liability equal  the percentage reporting no tax liability divided by the percentage  reporting positive tax liability. For the sample of all FCCs and USCCs in  1996, for example, 67.6 percent of FCCs reported no tax liability. (See table  21.) The odds of an FCC reporting no tax liability in that year was 2.08,  which equals 67.6/32.4 and implies that 2.08 of FCCs reported no tax  liability for every FCC that reported some tax liability, or that 208 FCCs  reported no tax liability for every 100 FCCs that reported some tax liability.  Since 60.3 percent of USCCs reported no tax liability in 1996, the odds of  USCCs reporting no tax liability was 1.52, which equals 60.3/39.7. The  unadjusted ratio of these odds, which is 2.08/1.52 = 1.37, apart from  rounding, implies that FCCs were more likely than USCCs to have reported  no tax liability by a factor of 1.37. While odds are somewhat less familiar  than percentages, the use of odds and odds ratios are unlike percentages  and percentage differences, which are unaffected by whether we choose to  look at the likelihood of whether an outcome does or does not occur, and  by how likely or unlikely the outcome is across the subgroups we are  comparing.
Table 21 shows how different all FCCs and USCCs were, using both  percentage differences and odds ratios in each year, in terms or reporting  no tax liability or tax liability of less than 5 percent of total income. Both  before (unadjusted) and after (adjusted) controlling for age and industry  sector, in every year FCCs were significantly more likely than USSCs to  have reported no tax liability, with odds ratios ranging from roughly 1.37 to  roughly 1.79. At the same time, FCCs were significantly less likely than  USCCs to have reported tax liability of less than 5 percent in all years, with  odds ratios ranging from roughly 0.49 to 0.78.
Table 22 shows how different large FCCs and USCCs were in each year in  terms of reporting no tax liability or less than 5 percent of tax liability  relative to income. The unadjusted odds ratios reveal that before  controlling for age and industry sector, large FCCs were in every year  significantly less likely than large USSCs to have reported no tax, and in all  years except for 1996, they were significantly less likely to report less than  5 percent in tax liability. After adjusting for age and industry, however,  differences between large FCCs’ and USCCs’ likelihood of reporting no tax  liability or less than 5 percent in tax liability were smaller except for one  year (1996). Large FCCs were more likely than large USCCs to report no  tax liability in 2 of the 5 years (1996 and 1998), less likely than large USCCs  to report no tax liability in 1 year (2000), and no different than large USCCs  in the other 2 years (1997 and 1999). With respect to reporting tax liabilities  of less than 5 percent, large FCCs were significantly more likely than  USCCs to have reported less than 5 percent in tax liability, after adjusting  for age and industry sector, in 1 year (1996), significantly less likely in 2  years (1999 and 2000), and no different than USCCs in the other 2 years  (1997 and 1998). Most of the statistically significant differences between  large FCCs and USSCs were quite modest, and the odds ratios indicate that  the former were not very different from the latter in terms of reporting no  tax liability or of reporting tax liability less than 5 percent of total income.
section_title: GAO Contacts and Staff Acknowledgments
subsections: section_title: GAO Contacts
section_title: Acknowledgments
paragraphs: In addition to the individuals above, Jeff Arkin, Susan Baker, Amy  Friedheim, Shirley Jones, Don Marples, John Mingus, Amy Rosewarne, Sam  Scrutchins, Doug Sloane, Wendy Turenne, Jennifer Li Wong, and Jim Wozny  made key contributions to this report.
section_title: GAO’s Mission
paragraphs: The General Accounting Office, the audit, evaluation and investigative arm of  Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting its constitutional responsibilities  and to help improve the performance and accountability of the federal government  for the American people. GAO examines the use of public funds; evaluates federal  programs and policies; and provides analyses, recommendations, and other  assistance to help Congress make informed oversight, policy, and funding  decisions. GAO’s commitment to good government is reflected in its core values of  accountability, integrity, and reliability.
section_title: Obtaining Copies of GAO Reports and Testimony
paragraphs: The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no cost is  through the Internet. GAO’s Web site (www.gao.gov) contains abstracts and full- text files of current reports and testimony and an expanding archive of older  products. The Web site features a search engine to help you locate documents  using key words and phrases. You can print these documents in their entirety,  including charts and other graphics.
Each day, GAO issues a list of newly released reports, testimony, and  correspondence. GAO posts this list, known as “Today’s Reports,” on its Web site  daily. The list contains links to the full-text document files. To have GAO e-mail this  list to you every afternoon, go to www.gao.gov and select “Subscribe to   e-mail alerts” under the “Order GAO Products” heading.
subsections: section_title: Order by Mail or Phone
section_title: To Report Fraud, Waste, and Abuse in Federal Programs
section_title: Public Affairs