kulawrKutafin Law ReviewKutafin Law Review2713-05252713-0533MSAL10.17803/2313-5395.2021.2.16.314-330kulawr-130Research ArticleARTICLESDigital Services Taxes: The International Experience and Relevance for the Russian FederationPonomarevaK. A.

Karina A. Ponomareva - Cand. Sci. (Law), Associate Professor, Department for State and Municipal Law

50 Let Profsoyuzov St., 100/1, Omsk 644077

karinaponomareva@gmail.comDostoevsky Omsk State UniversityRussian Federation20210407202182314330Copyright © Ponomareva K.A., 20212021Ponomareva K.A.Ponomareva K.A.Данная работа распространяется под лицензией Creative Commons Attribution 4.0.This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.https://kulawr.msal.ru/jour/article/view/130

The article deals with the problems arising in connection with the taxation of the digital economy, using the example of the proposals of the OECD and the EU on the introduction of a tax on digital services, as well as unilateral measures of national states in the area of taxation of the digital economy (on the example of the French digital tax). The main question for the study is whether unilateral measures imposing taxes on digital services represent a suitable solution to the tax problems that arise in connection with digitalization. Based on the legal analysis of both the EU Law provisions and domestic legal reality the author substantiates conclusions as applied to the Russian Federation.

tax lawdigital economyprofit taxationdigital services taxOECDEuropean UnionBEPS Action Plantax administrationReferencesAuerbach, A., Devereux, M.P., Keen, M. and Vella, J., (2017). Destination-Based Cash Flow Taxation. Oxford University Centre for Business Taxation, Working Paper, 17/01.Auerbach, A., Devereux, M.P., Keen, M. and Vella, J., (2017). Destination-Based Cash Flow Taxation. Oxford University Centre for Business Taxation, Working Paper, 17/01.Björn, W., (2014). Taxation of the Digital Economy: An EU Perspective. European Taxation, 54(12), pp. 541–544.Björn, W., (2014). Taxation of the Digital Economy: An EU Perspective. European Taxation, 54(12), pp. 541–544.Devereux, M.P. and Vella, J., (2018). Debate: Implications of Digitalization for International Corporate Tax Reform. Intertax, 46(6/7), pp. 550–559.Devereux, M.P. and Vella, J., (2018). Debate: Implications of Digitalization for International Corporate Tax Reform. Intertax, 46(6/7), pp. 550–559.Dimitropoulou, C., (2019). The Digital Services Tax and Fundamental Freedoms: Appraisal Under the Doctrine of Measures Having Equivalent Effect to Quantitative Restrictions. Intertax, 47(2), pp. 201–218.Dimitropoulou, C., (2019). The Digital Services Tax and Fundamental Freedoms: Appraisal Under the Doctrine of Measures Having Equivalent Effect to Quantitative Restrictions. Intertax, 47(2), pp. 201–218.Geringer, S., (2020). National Digital Taxes-Lessons from Europe. South African Journal of Accounting Research, 35(1), pp. 1–19, doi: 10.1080/10291954.2020.1727083.Geringer, S., (2020). National Digital Taxes-Lessons from Europe. South African Journal of Accounting Research, 35(1), pp. 1–19, doi: 10.1080/10291954.2020.1727083.Martín Jiménez, A., (2018). BEPS, the Digital(ized) Economy and the Taxation of Services and Royalties. Intertax, 46(8/9), pp. 620–638.Martín Jiménez, A., (2018). BEPS, the Digital(ized) Economy and the Taxation of Services and Royalties. Intertax, 46(8/9), pp. 620–638.Ponomareva, K., (2019). Comparison of Proposals to Adjust the Permanent Establishment Concept to the Digital Economy. Bulletin of International Taxation, 73(11), pp. 581–589.Ponomareva, K., (2019). Comparison of Proposals to Adjust the Permanent Establishment Concept to the Digital Economy. Bulletin of International Taxation, 73(11), pp. 581–589.

The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest present.