谁来帮我翻译啊

Taxation, Accounting and Transparency:

The Interaction ofFinancial and Tax Accounting

Martina Baumgatel

3. Transparency of the International Accounts andInfluence of Transparency on Tax Planning

3.1 Actual versus Effective Tax Rate

As the tax burdenconstitutes a cost factor to all business activities, the effective tax rateplays an important role for management, and not just the current tax payments haveto be looked at. The local accounting principles, but much more IAS/IFRS and U.S.GAAP lead to showing the “right” tax burden, taking temporary differences betweenaccounting and taxation as well into account, followed by numerous information ontaxes. This transparency of the accounts further leads to analysts challenging thetax burden and management needs for explanations of the tax line.Thus,information that was only a decade ago due to the tax secrecy in a lot ofcountries confidential constantly becomes more and more public.

Take the concept ofdeferred tax assets and tax liabilities. Postponed or up-front tax payments dueto differences in calculating taxable profits and losses which reverse over thetime loose importance. These timing differences lead only to temporary tax savings/taxburden and as a consequence, a deferred tax liability/tax asset has to beaccounted for. The accounts show in these cases the overall tax burden that wouldarise based on the accounts of the prevailing year (i.e. current taxes and deferred taxes).

An example for timingdifferences which lead to setting up a tax asset are write downs that are notat once cknowledged for tax purposes, but reverse over time. As current taxesare higher than the tax burden that matches with the accounts, a deferred taxasset can be set up. A deferred tax liability may result from reserves whichare tax deductible according to national law, but constitute equity according toIFRS/U.S. GAAP.

According to international accountingprinciples, a tax asset on losses carried forward has as well to be set up:loss carry forwards lead to potential tax savings in the future, as theunderlying net business expenses are therefore not lost, but can be usedagainst future, not yet realized profits. However, the company has to examine therealization possibility of this tax asset, and in case that realization seemsnot/not fully realistic, make a total/partial valuation allowance.

Let me give twoexamples for permanent differences and their impact on the effective tax rate:Tax exempt dividends or capital gains lead to a tax rate below the actual taxrate in the prevailing country. The effective tax rate takes this into account.In case of additional profit distributions or capital gains that were notplanned the effective tax rate is even lower than the expected effective taxrate. Interest expenses, which in some countries are not tax-deductible if indirect connection with tax exempt
incomelead to a higher effective tax rate than the normal local tax rate. If refinancingis shifted to another location (e.g. debt push down), and the interest burden is in thiscountry deductible, then the overall tax burden decreases.

Of course one hasalways to be aware of so-called quasi-permanent differences, i.e. differences thatnever reverse due to the prevailing individual situation of the company: As anexample, the minimum taxation in Germany might lead to a situation, especiallywith regard to volatile businesses, that loss carry forwards can be used up intheory, but not in practice, as profits have always to be integrated to 40% intaxable income regardless of a still existing loss carry forward.

3.2 Disclosures and Notes to the Accounts

In the internationalaccounts, an explanation of the main drivers of the effective tax rate(compared to the expected tax rate) is done in a so-called “reconciliation”. Asfar as this information has to be disclosed (e.g. Form 20-F), this transparency leads to adeeper analysis and understanding of the tax situation, as well as of business decisions:e.g. in case of hightax-exempt income the analysts might assume that extraordinary (not operating)income was earned (e.g. additional profit distribution or additional capitalgains).

In case tax assets onloss carry forwards are written down, this might be a consequence of tooaggressive multi year plans in the past. However, it might also be the consequenceof tax rate changes (e.g. the tax reform 2008 in Germany will lead to a write downon tax assets on losses and other temporary differences of around 25%),as thetax rate differential is 10% (40% to 30%). If the company that suffers thewrite down as a consequence of the tax rate decrease shows operating profits,this effect should then be interpreted in a positive way, as this means a lowertax burden in case of profitability in the future. Thus the hit has rather tobe taken as a one time effect.

A write back on deferred tax assets on lossesmight have different reasons as well: It might be a consequence ofoverachieving on plans and targets and therefore higher taxable operatingincome. It might be the consequence of structures to use up losses, e.g. buying in of incomeor selling of loss carry forwards to external parties.

And of course,effects of tax audits might be open to the analysts in case of materiality aswell. In this context, the question might arise, whether or not tax planning wastoo aggressive. The setting up of tax contingency reserves might also havequite different reasons: It can be an indicator for too aggressive taxplanning, but as wellof uncertain tax interpretation or change in jurisdiction.

3.3 Possibilities and Boundaries for Tax Rate“Management”

Of course, earningsas well as tax rate “management” is strictly forbidden. But with e.g. postponing oraccelerating business decisions in cases where the tax treatment does notfollow the accounting treatment, the effective tax rate could of course be influenced.E.g., the decision toadditionally sell tax-exempt stock might be taken shortly prior or afteryear-end, leading to effects on the effective tax rate in the old or newbusiness year. Tax planning strategies, e.g. the sale of loss carry forwards if possible–, might lead to a revaluation of tax assets and therefore to a lower effectivetax rate. But companies always have to bear in mind that too aggressive tax planningmight lead to high contingency reserves or tax expenses for prior years, yet aloneperhaps interest on delayed tax payments.

In the insurance markets as well as in thehedge fund area, a market for insuring tax risks is currently developing.However, taking out insurance of tax risks – if possible at all – is verycomplex. First of all, the contracts and documentation behind require a lot ofthoughts, are technically complex and must reflect all possible risks – in orderto avoid problems with the insurer afterwards. Second, the advantage of insuringtax risks is still questionable from the insurer’s side. Offering insurance doesonly make sense if the insurer is more convinced than the insured thatpotential negative tax consequences do not arise. Otherwise, the premium couldbe as high as the discounted worst case scenario, which would be unacceptablefor the insured. Finally the insurer will always look for a self-retention ofthe insured, or at least for the full right to settle the case with the taxauthorities, as otherwise the insurer’s position might be rather weak. This tosome extent contradicts the interests of the insured, who very often seeks toget rid of the whole risk, or will at least try to further on lead thenegotiations with the fiscal authorities.

From an accountingpoint of view, insurance of tax risks might influence the effective tax rate aswell: Insurance premiums as well as claims settlements lead to expenses/incomein the pre-tax result. However, it depends on the prevailing jurisdiction andprevailing single case whether or not the insurance premium is tax deductible.The same is true for any claims settlements: If these payments are taxable, itis necessary to get an insurance cover on the “grossed-up” amount, as taxpayments on settlements would otherwise lead to losses even in case ofinsurance. Any tax payments as a consequence of settlement very likely go ingeneral through the tax line. This would result in a distortion between pre-taxincome and tax line. So, even if from an economic point of view insurance oftax risks could make sense, the effects on the effective tax rate have to beevaluated as well, even if these effects are potentially not decisive for thedecision to take out insurance on tax risks.

我不会，帮不了你啊

try to search translate web sites

呵呵，果断没人气的说……忙碌的人们啊……

最晚什么时候要？我翻译

你要是有一句不懂还能帮你看看，你这贴上来这么一大段，谁能有时间替你翻。。。自己动手，丰衣足食。。

google translate啊，
你这吧唧一大断，给我1000币我也不可能认真翻的啊，

这个工作量有点太大啊

课税、会计和透明：
财务的和税会计的交互作用
Martina Baumgatel
3. 透明对税计划的国际帐户和影响力的透明
3.1 实际的对有效的税率
当做税负担组成一个费用因素至所有商务活动，有效的税率为管理扮演重要角色，而且不只是现在的税付款必须被看。地方会计原则，但是更多 IAS／IFRS 和 U.S.GAAP 带领到表现 " 正确的 " 税负担，恐怕最好进入因关于税的很多资讯而而起的帐户之内采取会计和课税之间的暂时的不同。帐户的这一个透明促进领引对分析家挑战税负担和为税线的解释管理需要。因此，数据，只有十年前是由于机密的在许多国家的税秘密，不变地变成越来越公众。

拿延期的税资产的观念而且课以税责任。延期或对计算可课税的利润的不同的向上前面税务手续费和损失相反在时间之上解放重要性。这些时间安排不同领引只有对暂时的税储蓄／税负担结果，被延期的税责任／税资产必须被解释。帐户在这些情况表示被基于盛行很广的年的帐户的会出现的全部的税负担（也就是 现在的税而且延期了税）.

为带领的时间安排不同的一个例子到建立一个税资产是写下那随着时间的过去不立刻确认税收的目的。当做现在的税比以帐户相配的税负担高，被延期的税资产能被建立。被延期的税责任可能起因于税的预备品可扣除的依照国家的法律，但是依照 IFRS／美国 GAAP 构成公正。

依照国际的会计原则，在被携带的损失上的一个税资产向前恐怕最好有被建立：损失进位未来转寄领引到潜在的税储蓄，因为在下面的净商务费用是因此不失去的，但是能被用对抗未来，不仍然了解利润。然而，公司必须调查这一个税资产的实现可能性，和以防万一实现似乎不是完全现实，制造一个总计的／部分的评价津贴。

让我为长备的不同和他们对于有效的税率影响举出两个例子：税免除的被除数或资本收益领引对税率在盛行很广的国家实际的税率下面。有效的税率考虑这。如果另外利润分配或没被计画有效的税率的资本收益甚至比预期的有效税率低。使费用感兴趣，这在一些国家是不课以税可扣除的如果与税免税者的间接的连接对比较高的有效税率超过正常的当地税率。如果再借被移转到另外的一个位置（举例来说 债务推向下）, 和这使负担感兴趣是在这一个国家可扣除的，当时全部税负担减少。

当然，一有总是知道所谓类似－烫发不同，也就是 由于公司的盛行很广个别情形不要颠倒的不同： 为例，在德国的最小的课税可能导致一种情形，尤其是关于挥发性的商店，那损失进位转寄能理论上被用光，但是不在练习中，如同有益于已经总是不管静止的现有损失进位被整合到在可课税的收入中的 40% 向前的。

3.2 对帐户的揭发和笔记

在国际的帐户中，有效税率 （与预期的税率相较）的主要驾驶员的一种解释在一个所谓的 " 和解 " 中被做。当做远远地当做这数据必须被揭露（举例来说 形式 20-F）, 这一个透明导致一项较深的分析和税情形的理解，连同商务决定：举例来说 如果高度免税收入，分析家可能承担特别的 （不操作）收入被赚了（举例来说 另外利润分配或另外资金收入）.

以防万一在损失结转上的税资产被写下，这可能在过去是太攻击性的多年结果计划。然而，它也可能是税率变化的结果（举例来说 在德国的税务改革 2008 将会带领到一在损失和其他较暂时不同的大约 25% 上的税资产上写下),当做这课以税比率两路线的运费差额是 10%(40%-30%).如果遭受的公司这写下由于税率减少表示操作利润，当时这一效果应该以积极的方式被解释，于此这未来意谓收益性的在情形较低的税负担。如此击中宁可有当做一次的效果被拿。

一在损失上的延期税资产上回信可能有不同的理由恐怕最好： 它可能是比预期要好对计划和目标的结果因此比较高的可课税的营业收入。用光损失可能是结构的结果，举例来说 买在收入或损失进位的销售转寄到外部的派对。

而且当然，税稽核的效果也可能对实质性的在情形分析家开放。在这背景中，疑问可能出现，是否计划的税太攻击性。设定向上税突发事件预备品也可能有相当不同理由： 它可能是太攻击性的税计划的一个指示器，但是恐怕最好不确定税解释或者在司法权中改变。


3.3 可能性和边界为税率 " 管理 "

当然，所得和税率 " 管理 " 严格被禁止。但是与举例来说 延期或加速商务决定以防万一哪里课税方式不跟随会计治疗，有效的税率会当然是受影响的.E.g。， 此外卖免税的存货的决定可能不久居先或之后被拿年底，对对有效的税率影响带领在老年人或新的商务年。课以税计划策略，举例来说 损失进位的售卖转寄如果可能的，可能导致一个税资产的再评价因此对比较低的有效税率。但是公司总是必须记住，计划的太攻击性的税可能对高度突发事件预备品带领或者有之前的年之久课以税费用，然而独自地也许在延迟的税付款上感兴趣。

在保险方面销售和在避险基金区域，保险税危险的一个市场现在发展中一样好。然而，拿出税的保险的危险－如果可能的全然－非常复杂。首先，契约和文件是被认为需要运气的，技术上复杂而且一定反映所有可能的危险－为了要然后避免保险公司的问题。其次，仍然保险税危险的利益从保险公司边是可疑的。提供保险只做有道理如果保险公司比投保人更确信潜能收入补助 结果不出现。另外，额外费用可能很像被打折的会对投保人无法接受的最坏的情形情节一样的高。最后保险公司将会总是找寻投保人的自我保持，或至少为完全的权利和税主管当局安顿情形，因为否则保险公司位置可能相当弱。在某种程度上这反驳投保人的兴趣，他们[她们] 时常试图免除整个危险，或将会至少试着在领引上和财政的主管当局促进谈判。

从会计观点，税危险的保险也可能影响有效的税率： 保险额外费用和要求殖民导致税前结果的费用／收入。然而，它取决于盛行很广的司法权而且获胜独身者预先探查，是否保险额外费用是税可扣除的。一样的对任何要求殖民真实： 如果这些付款是可课税的，得到在 " 总共赚得－向上的 " 数量方面的保险掩护是必需的，如同在殖民上课以税付款会另外导致损失甚至如果保险。这会导致一个税前收益和税之间的失真 。这会造成税前收入和税线之间的扭曲。因此，即使从一个税风险的经济观点保险会有道理，对实际税率的影响必须也被评估，即使这些结果可能地不是决定性的作为在税风险上拿出保险的决断。