Seçilmiş AB Ülkelerinde ve Türkiye’de Patent Gelirlerine İlişkin Vergileme “Patent Box” Rejimi

Year 2016, Volume: 24 Issue: 29, 183 - 203, 29.10.2016

Işıl Fulya Orkunoğlu Şahin Ahmet Burçin Yereli

https://doi.org/10.17233/se.2016.07.001

Abstract

“Patent Box” rejimi, patent gelirlerine sağlanan indirimli kurumlar vergisi oranını ifade eder. Bu rejimle ulusal bazda fikrî mülkiyet haklarının, bu hakların sahiplerinin ve bu haklarla elde edilecek gelirlerin korunması amaçlanmaktadır. Çalışmada Patent Box uygulamasının seçilmiş AB ülkelerindeki ve Türkiye’deki durumu karşılaştırmalı olarak ele alınmaktadır. AB Yenilikçilik Kriterlerine göre Türkiye’nin yenilikçilik performansı, patent başvuruları ile marka ve tasarım oluşturmada AB ortalamasının altındadır. Patent gelirleri Fransa’da %15, İngiltere’de %10 indirimli kurumlar vergisine tabi iken; Belçika ve Lüksemburg’da patent gelirlerinin %20’si, İspanya’da %50’si vergiye tabidir. İrlanda’da patent gelirlerinin tamamı vergiden istisnadır. Türkiye’de ise 2014 yılında patent gelirlerine %50 kurumlar vergisi ve gelir vergisi istisnası getirilmiştir.

References

• Alstadsaeter, A. & S. Barrios & G. Nicodeme & A.M. Skonieczna & A. Vezzani (2015), “Patent Boxes Design, Patents Location and Local R&D”, European Commission Taxation Papers, Working Paper No. 57, January, 1-48.
• Atkinson, R. & S. Andes (2011), Innovation in Tax Policy and Tax Policy for Innovation, October, <http://www.itif.org/files/2011-patent-box-final.pdf>, 10.10.2015, 1-22.
• Aykın, H. (2014), “Ticarileşmiş Sınai Mülkiyet Haklarından Elde Edilen Kazançlar İçin Yeni Vergisel Teşvik: Patent Box Rejimi”, Vergi Sorunları Dergisi, Eylül, 312, 75-86.
• Bevington, M. & N. Dolman & M. Blunt, (2015),“Green Light for New Approach to Patent Boxes”, Tax/ Intellectual Property, March, <http://www.bakermckenzie.com/files/Publication/04d9b738-aa4c-4eb9-a2dc-6ba68e636351/Presentation/PublicationAttachment/73e539f9-c2ff-44bc-962a-6e70e1c7e014/al_london_patentboxes_mar15.pdf>, 11.10.2015, 1-3.
• Böhm, T. & T. Karkinsky & N. Riedel (2012), “The Impact of Corporate Taxes on R&D
• and Patent Holdings”, NBER Trans-Atlantic Public Economics Seminar of Business
• Taxation, June, <http://conference.nber.org/confer//2012/TAPES12/Boehm_Karkinsky_Riedel.pdf>, 10.10.2015, 1-42.
• Bradley, S. & E. Dauchy & L. Robinson (2015), Cross-Country Evidence on the Preliminary Effects of Patent Box Regimes on Patent Activity and Ownership, October, <http://www.researchgate.net/publication/283017176_Cross-Country_Evidence_on_the_Preliminary_Effects_of_Patent_Box_Regimes_on_Patent_Activity_and_Ownershi>, 17.09.2015, 1-32.
• Deloitte, (2012), R&D Tax Update Patent Box Regimes What’s Inside?, 5 March, <http://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/Deloitte/ca/Documents/tax/ca-en-tax-patent-box-regimes.pdf>, 10.10.2015, 1-3.
• Deloitte (2015), AB Kurumlar Vergisi Oranları, August, <http://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/Deloitte/global/Documents/Tax/dttl-tax-corporate-tax-rates-2015.pdf>, 20.10.2015, 1-12.
• Dischinger, M. & N. Riedel (2008), “Corporate Taxes and the Location of Intangible Assets within Multinational Firms”, Seminar for Economic Policy, Department of Economics, 28 July, University of Munich, <http://www.researchgate.net/publication/5164223_Corporate_Taxes_and_the_Location_of_Intangible_Assets_Within_Multinational_Firms>, 15.10.2015, 1-34.
• Dischinger, M. & N. Riedel (2011), “Corporate Taxes and the Location of Intangible
• Assets within Multinational Firms”, Journal of Public Economics, 95(7), 691-707.
• Duhigg, C. & D. Kocieniewski (2012), “How Apple Sidesteps Billions in Taxes”, The New York Times, April 28, <http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/29/business/apples-tax-strategy-aims-at-low-tax-states-and-nations.html?_r=2&scp=1&sq=Peter%20Oppenheimer&st=Search>, 19.10.2015.
• Erb K., P. (2014), Ireland Declares ‘Double Irish’ Tax Scheme Dead, October 15, <http://www.forbes.com/sites/kellyphillipserb/2014/10/15/ireland-declares-double-irish-tax-scheme-dead/>, 15.10.2015.
• Ernst &Young (2015), “OECD Explains Agreed Aproach on Intangible Property Regimes Under BEBPS Action”, Global Tax Alert, 9 February, <http://www.ey.com/Publication/vwLUAssets/OECD_explains_agreed_approach_on_intangible_property_regimes_under_BEPS_Action_5/$FILE/2015G_CM5191_OECD%20explains%20agreed%20approach%20on%20intangible%20property%20regimes%20under%20BEPS%20Action%205.pdf>, 19.09.2015, 1-4.
• Ernst, C. & C. Spengel (2011), “Taxation, R&D Tax Incentives and Patent Application in
• Europe”, ZEW Discussion Papers, 11-024, <ftp://ftp.zew.de/pub/zew-docs/dp/dp11024.pdf>, 13.10.2015, 1-39.
• Ernst, C. & K. Richter & N. Riedel (2014), “Corporate Taxation and The Quality of
• Research and Development”, International Tax and Public Finance, <http://ftp.zew.de/pub/zew-docs/dp/dp13010.pdf>, 13.10.2015, 1-33.
• European Commission (2010), Commission Staff Workıng Document Lisbon Strategy Evaluation Document, <http://ec.europa.eu/europe2020/pdf/lisbon_strategy_evaluation_en.pdf, Brussels, 10.10.2015, 1-22.
• European Commission (2010a), Europe 2020, <http://ec.europa.eu/eu2020/pdf/COMPLET%20EN%20BARROSO%20%20%20007%20-%20Europe%202020%20-%20EN%20version.pdf>, 10.10.2015, 1-37.
• European Council (2013), Unified Patent Court Agreement, <http://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/documents-publications/agreements-conventions/agreement/?aid=2013001>, 20.10.2015.
• European Commission (2014), “A Study on R&D Tax Incentives”, Working Paper No. 52, November 28, <https://ec.europa.eu/futurium/en/system/files/ged/28-taxud-study_on_rnd_tax_incentives_-_2014.pdf>, 10.10.2015, 1-130.
• European Commission (2014a), A Study on R&D Tax Incentives Annex: Country Fiches, November, <http://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/resources/documents/taxation/gen_info/economic_analysis/tax_papers/country_fiches.pdf>, 13.10.2015, 1-113.
• Eurostat (2015a), Patent Applications to the EPO, July 9, <http://appsso.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/nui/show.do>, 20.10.2015.
• Eurostat (2015b), Community Trade Mark (CTM) Applications, June 18, <http://appsso.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/nui/show.do>, 20.10.2015.
• Eurostat (2015c), “Community Designs (CD) Applications”, June 18, <http://appsso.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/nui/show.do>, 20.10.2015.
• European Patent Office (2013), Unitary Patent, Unified Patent Court, <http://www.epo.org/law-practice/unitary.html>, 20.10.2015.
• Evers, L. & H. Miller & C. Spengler, (2015), “Intellectual Property Box Regimes: Effective Tax Rates and Tax Policy Considerations”, International Tax Public Finance, 22(3), <http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10797-014-9328-x>, 13.10.2015, 502-530.
• Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer llp FBD (2013), UK Patent Box, December, <http://www.freshfields.com/uploadedFiles/SiteWide/Knowledge/UK%20patent%20box%20-%20EU%20decision%20deferred.pdf>, 15.10.2015, 1-2.
• Griffith, R. & H. Miller & M. O’Connel (2011), Corporate Taxes and the Location of Intellectual Property, <ftp://ftp.zew.de/pub/zew-docs/veranstaltungen/innovationpatenting2011/papers/Miller.pdf>, 13.10.2015, 1-40.
• Griffith, R. & H. Miller & M. O’Connel (2014), “Ownership of Intellectual Property and
• Corporate Taxation”, Journal of Public Economics, 112, 12-23.
• Hennigan, M. (2015), Ireland: ‘Knowledge Box’ Patent Tax Rate Expected to Be 5%, <http://www.finfacts.ie/irishfinancenews/article_1028610.shtml>, 14 January, 13.10.2015.
• Hill, W. & J.S. Rhyne (2013), “Opening Pandora’s Patent Box: Global Intellectual Property Tax Incentives and Their Implication for the United States”, IDEA - The Intellectual Property Law Review, University of New Hampshire School of Law, 53, no. 3, 371-408.
• Hollanders, H. vd. (2015), “Innovation Union Scoreboard 2015”, European Commission Report, <http://ec.europa.eu/growth/industry/innovation/facts-figures/scoreboards/files/ius-2015_en.pdf>, 1-100.
• Huizinga, H. & L. Laeven (2008), “International Profit Shifting Within Multinationals: A Multi-Country Perspective”, Journal of Public Economics, 92(5–6), 1164–1182.
• Ireland Official Report (2010), Parliamentary Debates, 7 December 2010, <http://debates.oireachtas.ie/dail/2010/12/07/unrevised2.pdf>, 150-414.
• Kalloe, V. (2014), “EU and OECD Aspects of IP Regimes”, KPMG&Zifo Congress, 2 July, <http://www.belastingrechtaandevu.nl/Portals/0/images/140702_Sheets_panel2.pdf>, 11.10.2015, 1-10.
• Karkinsky, T. & N. Riedel (2012), “Corporate Taxation and The Choice of Patent
• Location Within Multinational Firms”, Journal of International Economics, 88(1),
• -185.
• Knight, B. & G. Maragani (2013), “It is Time for the United States to Implement a Patent Box Regime to Encourage Domestic Manufacturing”, Stanford Journal of Law, 19, Business & Finance, 39-62.
• KPMG (2013), Luxembourg - A Hub for Intellectual Property, <https://www.kpmg.com/LU/en/IssuesAndInsights/Articlespublications/Documents/Luxembourg-IP.pdf>, 13.10.2015, 1-8.
• McAlister, N. (2011), “The UK Patent Box”, Intellectual Property & Technology Law Journal, November 23(11), 21-26.
• Merrill, P. & R. James & J. Shanahan & J. Elías & T. Gómez & G. Glon & P. Grocott & A. Lamers & D. MacDougall & A. Macovei & R. Montredon & T. Vanwelkenhuyzen & A. Cernat & S. Merriman & R. Moore & G. Muresan & P. Berghe & A. Linczer (2012), “Is It Time for the United States to Consider the Patent Box?”, Pwc Tax Notes, March 26, <https://www.pwc.com/us/en/washington-national-tax/assets/merrill0326.pdf>, 28.10.2015, 1665-1675.
• O’Hora, A. (2014), Budget 2015: New ‘Knowledge Box’ Tax Incentive Scheme to be Targeted in EU Probe, <http://www.independent.ie/business/irish/budget-2015-new-knowledge-box-tax-incentive-scheme-to-be-targeted-in-eu-probe-30671379.html>, 13.10.2015.
• OECD (2013), “Growth, Innovation and Competitiveness Maxsimising the Benefits of Knowledge-Based Capital”, Taxation of Knowledge-Based Capital In A Globalised Economy, OECD Conference Centre France, 13-14 February, <https://www.oecd.org/sti/ind/Background%20Notes%20-%20ALL%20web.pdf >, 13.10.2015, 1-8.
• OECD (2015), Agreement on Modified Nexus Approach for IP Regimes, <http://www.oecd.org/ctp/beps-action-5-agreement-on-modified-nexus-approach-for-ip-regimes.pdf>, 16.10.2015, 1-8.
• PWC (2011), A Comparison of Key Aspects of the International Tax Systems of Major OECD and Developing Countries, <http://businessroundtable.org/sites/default/files/BRT_14_country_international_tax_comparison_20100510.pdf>, 20.10.2015, 1-17.
• PWC (2013a), “European Patent Box Regimes”, Japan External Trade Organisation, April 11, <https://www.jetro.go.jp/ext_images/world/europe/ip/pdf/european_patent_box_regimes_en.pdf>, 20.10.2015, 1-17.
• PWC (2013b) “Patent Box and Technology Incentives: Tax and Financial Reporting Considerations”, 20 August, Tax Accounting Service, <http://www.pwc.com/us/en/tax-accounting-services/assets/pwc-patent-box-and-technology-incentives-tax-and-reporting-considerations.pdf>, 15.10.2015, 1-14.
• PWC (2014), Global Research & Development Incentives Group, May, <http://www.pwc.com.tr/tr/ar-ge/yayinlar/pwc-ar-ge-vergisel-destek-ve-tesvik.pdf>, 20.10.2015, 8-11.
• Scott, T. & J. Ross (2012), “The New Patent Box Regime and Corporate Tax Reform in the UK”, International Tax Journal, September-October, 55-62.
• Shanahan, J. (2011), “Is it Time for Your Country to Consider the "Patent Box"?”, PwC’s Global R&D Tax Symposium on Designing a Blueprint for Reducing the After-Tax Cost of Global R&D, Dublin, Ireland,
• May 23, 1-10.
• Şakar, Y.A. (2015), “Innovation for a New Tax Incentive: Patent Box Regime”, Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, July 195, 544-553.
• Taxand (2010), Dutch IP Regime with a %5 Effective Tax Rate, <http://www.taxand.com/taxands-take/news/dutch-ip-regime-5-effective-tax-rate>, 10.10.2015.
• Wood, R. (2014), Ireland Corks Double Irish Tax Deal, Closing Time for Apple, Google, Twitter, Facebook, <http://www.forbes.com/sites/robertwood/2014/10/14/ireland-corks-double-irish-tax-deal-closing-time-for-apple-google-twitter-facebook/>, 14.10.2015.