年-德勤全球_Tax_Management_Consulting_12页_1mb

Deloitte Global Tax Management Research Summary (February 2017)

Core Content

Deloitte's global research on tax management within large multinational corporations, spanning seven years from 2010 to 2016, highlights the evolving challenges and aspirations of tax leaders in the face of increasing regulation, globalization, and commercial pressures. The research includes over 1,200 interviews with tax decision-makers from nearly 5,000 organizations with annual revenue exceeding $200 million and operations in five or more countries.

Main Tax Operating Models

Deloitte categorizes global tax operating models into three types:

• Method 1: Decentralized model, where all work is undertaken locally with little global oversight.
• Method 2: Centrally coordinated model, where work is often delivered locally but is overseen and coordinated centrally.
• Method 3: Centralized model, where most work is carried out and managed from a central location.

Key Findings:

• Nearly two-thirds (66%) of global organizations use some form of centralized model (Methods 2 and 3).
• North American organizations are the most centralized, with 80% using Method 3.
• The pace of centralization has slowed, with forecasts suggesting similar model distributions in the next three years.
• One-third of the 20% not currently using global tax models plan to move to a more centralized approach within three years.

Commercial Drivers of Tax Management

• Quality and control have remained the most important drivers since 2010.
• In 2014, over half of respondents expected process efficiency and value addition to become more important, but recent regulatory changes have reinforced the emphasis on quality and control.
• Process efficiency is anticipated to grow in importance in the coming years, especially for highly centralized organizations.
• Control is expected to become even more critical due to the increasing complexity and volume of global regulatory compliance.

Satisfaction with Current State

• Satisfaction levels with current tax operating models have dropped significantly.
• Only 16% are satisfied with process efficiency, indicating that efficiency improvements have not yet been realized.
• Method 2 models show the highest satisfaction (36%), but nearly two-thirds still see room for improvement.
• Method 1 models have the lowest satisfaction (25%), while Method 3 models have experienced the largest drop in satisfaction since 2014.

Resourcing Models

• There is a general preference for in-house management of key global tax reporting processes.
• Organizations using shared service centers tend to report higher satisfaction than average.
• There is a growing interest in moving transfer pricing documentation and indirect tax processes towards in-house shared services or outsourcing.

Country by Country Reporting

• 66% of global companies will be required to undertake Country by Country (CbC) reporting under OECD BEPS Action 13.
• 89% of these companies have made a clear decision on their approach, with a polarization between top-down and bottom-up methods.
• Top-down reporting is most common among large, centralized organizations.
• 72% of companies plan to reconcile CbC reporting with local filings.

Tax Governance and Risk

• 74% of tax decision-makers report tax risk regularly to the board, but only 36% formally assess risk appetite and have processes in place to manage it.
• 44% have a formal written tax policy, but only 28% have it signed off at the board level.
• Only half of those with a formal policy have converted it into an operational plan and are confident it is being followed.
• Regional differences are significant, with 46% of European multinationals having a board-approved tax policy, compared to 20% in Asia-Pacific and 8% in North America.

Tax Technology

• Only 12% of organizations have a specific individual responsible for tax technology, with appropriate budget and formal plans.
• Method 3 organizations are more likely to have a formal tax technology plan (34%) and budget (65%).
• Largest organizations (30+ countries) are more likely to have a dedicated tax technology role (82%).
• Only 20% feel they currently derive high benefit from technology for process efficiency, but 66% believe it has high potential.
• Only 22% derive high benefit from technology in improving data quality and accuracy, but 64% see high potential.
• 70% of respondents have at least one emerging technology (e.g., dashboarding, big data, robotic process automation, cognitive computing) on their radar.
• Major concerns include:
  • 91% worry about implementation time and resources.
  • 86% express concern about a lack of tax technology knowledge within the business.
  • 76% struggle with securing budget for technology initiatives.

Looking Forward

• The current centralized models have not yet delivered the anticipated benefits.
• A renewed focus on process efficiency, resourcing optimization, and technology adoption is expected.
• The challenge lies in effectively planning, managing, and funding technology initiatives.
• A new 'business as usual' may be necessary to manage the growing reporting and stakeholder expectations.
• Future Deloitte research will likely explore how organizations can achieve meaningful change in the tax management landscape.

Conclusion

The global tax management environment is undergoing significant transformation, but many organizations are still struggling with the implementation of new technologies and the realization of benefits from centralized models. While the desire for improvement remains strong, the path forward is uncertain, and a more strategic approach to governance, resourcing, and technology is essential for future success.