Global Arbitration, Trade and Advocacy
New USTR Investigation Shines Spotlight on Business Impact of Foreign Digital Services Taxes
What are DSTs?
Most DSTs tax revenues earned by companies providing certain digital services, such as targeted advertising, to users in the taxing jurisdiction. Recently, some countries have gone further, targeting revenues earned from other services, content (or intangible assets) and even goods delivered via e-commerce. For example, Indonesia imposes a tax on Indonesian consumers’ use of offshore intangible assets and services, such as the use or right to use images and/or sound recordings. India’s DST is broader still, extending to online sales of services and goods. The USTR investigation comes against the backdrop of a rapidly evolving proliferation of DSTs, with some countries accelerating adoption of these new taxes in order to counter the negative fiscal impact of the COVID 19 pandemic.
What is the focus and objective of the investigation?
The investigations are an attempt to pressure U.S. trading partners to repeal or halt implementation of their unilateral DSTs, while negotiations continue between countries to agree on rules on a multilateral basis for reform of the international tax framework. USTR investigations will focus on whether the DSTs discriminate against U.S. companies, apply taxes retroactively, or constitute “unreasonable tax policy” (in the sense that they diverge from norms reflected in the U.S. and international tax systems). USTR seeks comments from interested companies on these issues.
Comments could also address whether the DSTs are consistent with World Trade Organization (WTO) rules. The proposed DSTs that contemplate taxes on e-commerce arguably violate an agreed WTO moratorium on such measures. Moreover, DSTs that discriminate against digital supply as a means of delivery, exempt domestic suppliers from the tax burden faced by foreign suppliers, or that confer unreasonable compliance burdens on foreign suppliers, may run afoul of obligations under the WTO’s General Agreement on Trade in Services.
What remedial action can USTR take?
A Section 301 investigation may result in the adoption of remedial actions to protect U.S. companies, such as the imposition of tariffs or other restrictions on imports from offending countries. For example, the Trump Administration has used Section 301 to impose tariffs on over US$300 billion in Chinese imports to date. Alternatively, Section 301 investigations may result in the conclusion of an agreement with the offending countries to withdraw the DSTs. Last year, USTR initiated a similar investigation into France’s DST, concluding that the French DST discriminated against U.S. companies and contradicted prevailing international tax principles. USTR began a process to impose US$2.4 billion in tariffs on French imports. However, the United States and France agreed to delay collection of the French DST and any U.S. tariffs until the end of 2020, to give countries participating in multilateral talks at the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development additional time to agree on an international framework for taxation of digital services.
弁護士広告—Sidley Austin LLP はグローバルな法律事務所です。当事務所の所在地および連絡先情報は、www.sidley.com/en/locations/offices に掲載されています。
Sidley は、本情報をクライアントおよび関係者の皆様へのサービスとして、教育目的のみに提供しています。本情報は、法的助言として解釈または依拠されるべきものではなく、また弁護士と依頼者の関係を生じさせるものでもありません。読者は、専門家の助言を求めることなく本情報に基づいて行動すべきではありません。Sidley および Sidley Austin とは、www.sidley.com/disclaimer に記載のとおり、Sidley Austin LLP およびその関連パートナーシップを指します。
© Sidley Austin LLP
お問い合わせ
この Sidley Update に関してご質問がある場合は、通常ご担当されている Sidley の弁護士、またはご連絡ください。
Offices
得意分野
Suggested News & Insights
- Stay Up To DateSubscribe to Sidley Publications
- Follow Sidley on Social MediaSocial Media Directory

