| Peer-Reviewed

Analysis of Interest Deduction Rules Under Ethiopian Corporate Tax System

Received: 31 August 2020    Accepted: 19 September 2020    Published: 23 November 2020
Views:       Downloads:
Abstract

The use of third party and related party interest is one of the profit-shifting techniques available in international tax planning. The fluidity and fungibility of money make it a relatively simple exercise to adjust the mix of debt and equity in a controlled company. When the level of debt capital is much greater than the equity capital of the company thin capitalization occurs. Nowadays, thin capitalization is one of the major challenges to the corporate tax system of Ethiopia. Thin capitalization reduces government income from tax by increasing deductible interest paid or payable on the debt. To address this problem, Ethiopia has implemented tax rules restricting the deductibility of interest payments. This article aims to qualitatively examine the interest deduction rules under the Ethiopian income tax regimes through a qualitative analysis of existing literatures and laws. To this end, the analysis start unfolding the conceptual framework of interest deduction and its rules followed by an examination of interest deduction rules of Ethiopia. As the finding has revealed, the newly enacted federal income law has taken a big step in tightening the interest deduction rules through the adoption of debt-to-equity ratio and arm’s length approach to determine the maximum debt on which interest deductible. In doing so, the income tax rules of Ethiopia incorporated the indirect interest deduction rule which indirectly limits the amount interest on which is deduction is allowable. In addition to this, the withholding tax imposed on interest paid to non-resident and limit on maximum deductible interest rates are adopted as an interest deduction approach to supplement arm’s length and debt-to-equity ratio to protect tax base erosion. Despite these positive developments, the Ethiopian tax law has failed to recognize direct interest deduction rules which directly limit the maximum interest on which deduction is allowed. Nowadays, interest stripping rule is widely appreciated as the modern and most effective approach that directly restricts interest deduction. So, the failure to introduce a direct interest deduction rule is one of the major defect interest deduction rules in Ethiopia. Besides, the income tax law has failed to limit the special debt-equity ratio that applies to financial institutions. Furthermore, the tax law has failed to set a maximum deductible rate that applies to financial institutions licensed to lend in Ethiopia. To fill these gaps and ensure efficient protection of the tax base against erosion by deduction of interest payment, the researcher called for a direct interest deduction rule. Besides, the researcher called for the introduction of the debt-equity ratio that applies to a financial institution and the maximum deductible interest rate concerning the interest payment to legitimate financial institutions.

Published in International Journal of Science, Technology and Society (Volume 8, Issue 6)
DOI 10.11648/j.ijsts.20200806.11
Page(s) 122-137
Creative Commons

This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited.

Copyright

Copyright © The Author(s), 2024. Published by Science Publishing Group

Keywords

Thin Capitalization, Thin Capitalization Rules, Interest Deduction, Income Tax

References
[1] OECD Secretariat, Thin Capitalization Legislation, A Background Paper for Country Tax Administrations, (2012).
[2] Sotirios Apostolou, Thin Capitalization in the OECD, the EU and Sweden: Policy Responses, Evaluation and Alternatives, (Lund University, Master’s Thesis), (2018).
[3] Stuart Webber, Thin Capitalization and Interest Deduction Regulations, COPENHAGEN RESEARCH GROUP ON INTERNATIONAL TAXATION CORIT DISCUSSION PAPER NO. 8., 5 (2010).
[4] Mathew Olusanya, Transfer Pricing, and Thin Capitalization, (2013).
[5] Stuart Webber, Thin Capitalization and Interest Deduction Rules: A Worldwide Survey, TAX NOTES INTERNATIONAL, Vol. 60 (2010).
[6] Alexandra Maßbaum and Caren Sureth, Thin Capitalization Rules and Entrepreneurial Capital Structure Decisions, BUR BUSINESS RESEARCH OFFICIAL OPEN ACCESS J. of VHB, Vol. 2, Is. 2, 147-169, 147 &165(2009).
[7] Thiess Buettner et. al., Corporate Taxation, and Thin-Capitalization Rules, (2006).
[8] Michael Overesch and Georg Wamser, Corporate Tax Planning and Thin-Capitalization Rules: Evidence from a Quasi-Experiment, (2007).
[9] Jennifer Blouin et. al., Thin Capitalization Rules, and Multinational Firm Capital Structure, IMF WORKING PAPER WP/14/12, (2014).
[10] Thiess Buettner and Michael Overesch, The Impact of Thin-Capitalization Rules on Multinationals’ Financing and Investment Decisions, CESIFO WORKING PAPER NO. 1817, (2006).
[11] Peter A. Barnes, Limiting interest deductions, in UNITED NATIONS HANDBOOK ON SELECTED ISSUES IN PROTECTING THE TAX BASE OF DEVELOPING COUNTRIES 155, 167 (, Alexander Trepelkov, Harry Tonino and Dominika Halka eds.., 2015).
[12] OECD, Limiting Base Erosion Involving Interest Deductions and Other Financial Payments, Action 4 -2016 Update: Inclusive Framework on Base Erosion and Profit Shifting, OECD/G20 Base Erosion and Profit Shifting Project, OECD Publishing, Paris. http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264268333-en, 23(2017).
[13] OECD, Action Plan on Base Erosion and Profit Shifting, OECD PUBLISHING, (2013), see http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264202719-en, Available at 19/1/20191:05AM.
[14] Federal Income Tax Proclamation No. 286/2002.
[15] Council of Ministers Income Tax Regulations No. 78/2002.
[16] Federal Income Tax Proclamation 979/2016.
[17] Council of Ministers Federal Income Tax Regulation No. 410/2017.
[18] Banking Business Proclamation No. 592/2008.
[19] Micro-Financing Business Proclamation No. 626/2009.
[20] Insurance Business Proclamation No. 746/2012.
[21] National Bank of Ethiopia Establishment (as Amended) Proclamation No. 591/2008.
[22] Jinesh R Bhagdev & Srilakshmi Pai, Thin Capitalization Rules – Limitation on Interest deduction in certain Cases – Section 94B, (2017), PP-3.
[23] National Bank of Ethiopia External Loan Directive No. FXD/47/2017.
[24] Alfons J. Weichenrieder and Helen Windischbauer, Thin-Capitalization Rules and Company Responses Experience from German Legislation, CESIFO WORKING PAPER NO. 2456, (2008).
[25] Enken Cohrs, Interest Deduction LimitationRules in Sweden and Germany: A Comparison Regarding EU LawCompatibility and Appropriateness, (Master Thesis, Lund University), (2013).
[26] Ernst & Young LLP, Thin Capitalization Regimes in Selected Countries, Report Prepared for the Advisory Panel on Canada’s System of International Taxation, (2008).
[27] Yosef Alemu Gebreegziabher, Ethiopian Law on Transfer Pricing: A Critical Examination.
[28] Michael Overesch, The Impact of Thin-Capitalization Rules on Multinationals’ Financing and Investment Decisions, CESIFO WORKING PAPER NO. 1817, (2006).
Cite This Article
  • APA Style

    Desalegn Deresso Disassa. (2020). Analysis of Interest Deduction Rules Under Ethiopian Corporate Tax System. International Journal of Science, Technology and Society, 8(6), 122-137. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijsts.20200806.11

    Copy | Download

    ACS Style

    Desalegn Deresso Disassa. Analysis of Interest Deduction Rules Under Ethiopian Corporate Tax System. Int. J. Sci. Technol. Soc. 2020, 8(6), 122-137. doi: 10.11648/j.ijsts.20200806.11

    Copy | Download

    AMA Style

    Desalegn Deresso Disassa. Analysis of Interest Deduction Rules Under Ethiopian Corporate Tax System. Int J Sci Technol Soc. 2020;8(6):122-137. doi: 10.11648/j.ijsts.20200806.11

    Copy | Download

  • @article{10.11648/j.ijsts.20200806.11,
      author = {Desalegn Deresso Disassa},
      title = {Analysis of Interest Deduction Rules Under Ethiopian Corporate Tax System},
      journal = {International Journal of Science, Technology and Society},
      volume = {8},
      number = {6},
      pages = {122-137},
      doi = {10.11648/j.ijsts.20200806.11},
      url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijsts.20200806.11},
      eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.ijsts.20200806.11},
      abstract = {The use of third party and related party interest is one of the profit-shifting techniques available in international tax planning. The fluidity and fungibility of money make it a relatively simple exercise to adjust the mix of debt and equity in a controlled company. When the level of debt capital is much greater than the equity capital of the company thin capitalization occurs. Nowadays, thin capitalization is one of the major challenges to the corporate tax system of Ethiopia. Thin capitalization reduces government income from tax by increasing deductible interest paid or payable on the debt. To address this problem, Ethiopia has implemented tax rules restricting the deductibility of interest payments. This article aims to qualitatively examine the interest deduction rules under the Ethiopian income tax regimes through a qualitative analysis of existing literatures and laws.  To this end, the analysis start unfolding the conceptual framework of interest deduction and its rules followed by an examination of interest deduction rules of Ethiopia. As the finding has revealed, the newly enacted federal income law has taken a big step in tightening the interest deduction rules through the adoption of debt-to-equity ratio and arm’s length approach to determine the maximum debt on which interest deductible. In doing so, the income tax rules of Ethiopia incorporated the indirect interest deduction rule which indirectly limits the amount interest on which is deduction is allowable. In addition to this, the withholding tax imposed on interest paid to non-resident and limit on maximum deductible interest rates are adopted as an interest deduction approach to supplement arm’s length and debt-to-equity ratio to protect tax base erosion. Despite these positive developments, the Ethiopian tax law has failed to recognize direct interest deduction rules which directly limit the maximum interest on which deduction is allowed. Nowadays, interest stripping rule is widely appreciated as the modern and most effective approach that directly restricts interest deduction. So, the failure to introduce a direct interest deduction rule is one of the major defect interest deduction rules in Ethiopia. Besides, the income tax law has failed to limit the special debt-equity ratio that applies to financial institutions. Furthermore, the tax law has failed to set a maximum deductible rate that applies to financial institutions licensed to lend in Ethiopia. To fill these gaps and ensure efficient protection of the tax base against erosion by deduction of interest payment, the researcher called for a direct interest deduction rule. Besides, the researcher called for the introduction of the debt-equity ratio that applies to a financial institution and the maximum deductible interest rate concerning the interest payment to legitimate financial institutions.},
     year = {2020}
    }
    

    Copy | Download

  • TY  - JOUR
    T1  - Analysis of Interest Deduction Rules Under Ethiopian Corporate Tax System
    AU  - Desalegn Deresso Disassa
    Y1  - 2020/11/23
    PY  - 2020
    N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijsts.20200806.11
    DO  - 10.11648/j.ijsts.20200806.11
    T2  - International Journal of Science, Technology and Society
    JF  - International Journal of Science, Technology and Society
    JO  - International Journal of Science, Technology and Society
    SP  - 122
    EP  - 137
    PB  - Science Publishing Group
    SN  - 2330-7420
    UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijsts.20200806.11
    AB  - The use of third party and related party interest is one of the profit-shifting techniques available in international tax planning. The fluidity and fungibility of money make it a relatively simple exercise to adjust the mix of debt and equity in a controlled company. When the level of debt capital is much greater than the equity capital of the company thin capitalization occurs. Nowadays, thin capitalization is one of the major challenges to the corporate tax system of Ethiopia. Thin capitalization reduces government income from tax by increasing deductible interest paid or payable on the debt. To address this problem, Ethiopia has implemented tax rules restricting the deductibility of interest payments. This article aims to qualitatively examine the interest deduction rules under the Ethiopian income tax regimes through a qualitative analysis of existing literatures and laws.  To this end, the analysis start unfolding the conceptual framework of interest deduction and its rules followed by an examination of interest deduction rules of Ethiopia. As the finding has revealed, the newly enacted federal income law has taken a big step in tightening the interest deduction rules through the adoption of debt-to-equity ratio and arm’s length approach to determine the maximum debt on which interest deductible. In doing so, the income tax rules of Ethiopia incorporated the indirect interest deduction rule which indirectly limits the amount interest on which is deduction is allowable. In addition to this, the withholding tax imposed on interest paid to non-resident and limit on maximum deductible interest rates are adopted as an interest deduction approach to supplement arm’s length and debt-to-equity ratio to protect tax base erosion. Despite these positive developments, the Ethiopian tax law has failed to recognize direct interest deduction rules which directly limit the maximum interest on which deduction is allowed. Nowadays, interest stripping rule is widely appreciated as the modern and most effective approach that directly restricts interest deduction. So, the failure to introduce a direct interest deduction rule is one of the major defect interest deduction rules in Ethiopia. Besides, the income tax law has failed to limit the special debt-equity ratio that applies to financial institutions. Furthermore, the tax law has failed to set a maximum deductible rate that applies to financial institutions licensed to lend in Ethiopia. To fill these gaps and ensure efficient protection of the tax base against erosion by deduction of interest payment, the researcher called for a direct interest deduction rule. Besides, the researcher called for the introduction of the debt-equity ratio that applies to a financial institution and the maximum deductible interest rate concerning the interest payment to legitimate financial institutions.
    VL  - 8
    IS  - 6
    ER  - 

    Copy | Download

Author Information
  • School of Law, Assosa University, Assosa, Ethiopia

  • Sections