Cs207 8
1 like241 views
The document discusses concerns around the transfer of jobs and intellectual property through offshoring. It notes that while offshoring jobs to lower costs countries can be effective, it involves the concurrent transfer of corporate intellectual property and rights which is poorly understood. Over time, as more IP and income is generated by controlled foreign entities, there are risks that they could eventually gain control over the parent company through ownership. The effects of offshoring and use of tax havens to house intellectual property raise several problems and long term issues that require further analysis.
![Forest Labs flow
0. Initial transaction:
0. Initial transaction [from Business Week 14 May 2010]
IP rights transfer
IP rights transfer Cost $5
to Bermuda
to Bermuda
$64
IP rights FFBV
Forest FLI ($17+0.11 Irish tax)
Labs.Research,
St. Louis, MO FLR
$76 FRX
$99 6
$5 $7 a
FLH b 7
$2.38 US taxes for public use $50 available for new investment?
[Design Hermann Zschiegner]
11/18/2012 CS207 10](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/cs207-8-121201212609-phpapp01/85/Cs207-8-10-320.jpg)
![Problems
• There is a lack of trustworthy data
1. $ 209M spent [US commerce department, 2003]
+ 4 663 jobs lost [U.S. labor dept, 1Q04]
2. $2 400M income [Business week, in 2003]
+ 50 000 jobs gained [Indian NAS&S Cos, Fy04/4]
• Attitudes are inconsistent
Greenspan 1: IP rights have assumed increasing importance [27Feb03]
Greenspan 2: Our economy is best served by full and vigorous engagement in the
global economy – when defending reducing protection [11Mar03]
18-Nov-12 CS207 18](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/cs207-8-121201212609-phpapp01/85/Cs207-8-18-320.jpg)
![Not all taxhavens
are offshore: Delaware
Formal
HQ of HQ of
Coca-Cola, Ford, General Motors,
Google, Hewlett Packard, Intel, Kentucky
Fried Chicken, Texas Instruments and
200,000 more corporations
owner:
Corporation Trust,
a subsidiary of
Wolters-Kluwer, a
Dutch publishing house.
11/18/2012 CS207 [Shaxton:11] 21](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/cs207-8-121201212609-phpapp01/85/Cs207-8-21-320.jpg)
![ Symmetry
Exports and Transfers go both ways
• There is innovation everywhere
• If the U.S. imports IP, the receiver should pay
Basic and fundamental research in the U.S. is declining
Growth was motivated by WW II experience [Vannevar Bush]
Many countries now fund fundamental research
The ratio of applied to basic research is increasing
Industrial research is mainly applied
Technological research is rarely basic
Development requires more resources B F A D
Industrial and management infrastructure
Good in the U.S
Demonstration and Beta sites - early adopters
18-Nov-12 CS207 23](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/cs207-8-121201212609-phpapp01/85/Cs207-8-23-320.jpg)
Cs207 8
- 1. Signup sheet x 2 CS207 #8, 16 Nov 2012 Gio Wiederhold Hewlett 103 Drafts of reports received by 19Nov11 will receive feedback by 26Nov11 . Any make-up reports submitted by 15Nov11 are marked on the sign-up sheets. 11/18/2012 CS207 1
- 2. Syllabus: 1. Why should software be valued? 2. Principles of valuation. Cost versus value. 3. Market value of software companies. 4. Intellectual capital and property (IP). 5. The role of patents, copyrights, and trade secrets. 6. Open source software. Scope. Theory and reality 7. Life and lag of software innovation. 8. Sales expectations and discounting, Licensing. . 9. Alternate business models. 10. Separation of use rights from the property itself. 11. Risks when outsourcing and offshoring development. 12. Effects of using taxhavens to house IP. 13. Acquisitions and growth 11/18/2012 CS207 2
- 3. Offshoring Task transfer to Enterprises in Foreign countries Two aspects: 1. Work migration: jobs are moved to lower-cost countries 2. Support software etc. is moved to enable similar productivity in those countries Income is generated by people and (intellectual) capital 18-Nov-12 CS207 3
- 4. Hypothesis • Offshoring of jobs is effective because of concurrent Intellectual Property (IP) transfer • Much of that IP is corporate property • Transfer of corporate IP & IP rights is poorly understood IP as property is not well defined, hard to measure There are many components to IP, coming from open source, R&D, marketing, reputation as Patents, copyright, trade secret (covered by NDAs) • Even if hard to value, IP & IP rights is a significant export 18-Nov-12 CS207 4
- 5. Types of Foreign Entities • Independent Foreign Contractors IFC may serve multiple customers Share trade secrets with competitors IFC Owners need contracts to protect the IP Hard to monitor and enforce • Owned, Controlled Foreign Corporations CFC provides much more control over IP Ownership often in third-party countries CFC Avoids taxation of sales to other countries 18-Nov-12 CS207 5
- 6. Knowledge is the Link To be effective a worker has to know what has to be done • call center employees technicians • That knowledge consists of • engineers ● ● managers The technology Documentation, prior versions, quality control The business methods How technology in the product is marketed The flow from buyers to improved products and methods • Companies distinguish themselves by proprietary IP 1. Patents, sometimes Copyrights 2. Confidential Documents Trade 3. Knowledge within its people - protected by NDAs secrets 18-Nov-12 CS207 6
- 7. Taxhavens Places where 1. Taxes are low 2. Financial and IP supervision is minimal 3. Reporting requirements are minimal Dutch sandwich • Three cooperating types are needed 1. Primary tax havens (about a dozen countries) Small populations, Can live largely of license fees o Cayman Islands: pop. 50K, 90K companies @ 3000/year 2. Semi-taxhavens (more, but diverse) Large populations, need jobs Enact, often temporary, tax benefits for foreign work 3. Conduit taxhavens (few, small, financially active countries) trusted, separate taxhaven activities by ringfencing can shuffle funds invisible among locations 18-Nov-12 CS207 7
- 8. Flow Semi-taxhaven Malaysia, India MNC Conduit California Holland Primary IP Palm Island 11/18/2012 CS207 8
- 9. Structure MNC California Parent: I MNC P Malaysia,India +Holland +Palm Island Semi- CFCs: CFH: Primary MNC JB CONCH MNC MY Advisor: CFI: $ ATA CAAS $ €£¥ 11/18/2012 Conduit CS207 9
- 10. Forest Labs flow 0. Initial transaction: 0. Initial transaction [from Business Week 14 May 2010] IP rights transfer IP rights transfer Cost $5 to Bermuda to Bermuda $64 IP rights FFBV Forest FLI ($17+0.11 Irish tax) Labs.Research, St. Louis, MO FLR $76 FRX $99 6 $5 $7 a FLH b 7 $2.38 US taxes for public use $50 available for new investment? [Design Hermann Zschiegner] 11/18/2012 CS207 10
- 11. With Taxhavens: Three-party flow Parent corporation Offshore job sites Salaries Initial Inte- purchase $ $ gration High- License $$ fees value Sub corporation Products “CFH” IP docu- mentation purchased the rights to 18-Nov-12 CS207 11
- 12. Capital and IP creates more IP and Income Capital and IP Capital & IP in CFH at source Income Income 18-Nov-12 CS207 12
- 13. Example Apple paid less than 2% corporation tax on its profits outside the US, its filing with US regulators has shown. The company paid $713m in the year to 29 September on foreign pre-tax profits of $36.8bn, 1.9%. It is the latest company to be identified as paying low rates of overseas tax, following Starbucks, Facebook and Google in recent weeks. It has not been suggested that any of their tax avoidance schemes are illegal. All of the companies pay considerable amounts of other taxes in the UK, such as National Insurance, and raise large sums of VAT. Apple's figures for foreign tax appear on page 61 of its form 10-K filing with the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). The form is used to summarise the performance of public companies. It had paid a rate of 2.5% the previous year. Apple channels much of its business in Europe through a subsidiary in the Republic of Ireland, which has lower corporation tax than Britain. But even Ireland charges 12.5%, compared with Britain's 24%. Many multinational companies manage to pay substantially below the official corporation tax rates by using tax havens such as Caribbean islands. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-20197710 11/18/2012 CS207 13
- 14. Capital flow with a taxhaven Controlled Foreign Holding Company CFH CFC Source I PIP IP license IP Creator IP consumer Buy-in Tax havens: Income Income Capital and IP Vanuatu Royalties Cayman islands Capital Barbados Capital US Fees Foreign taxes taxes Tangibles are harder to move than IP 18-Nov-12 CS207 14
- 15. Job Flow @ different levels of personnel $ IP Parent ------------------------ CFC Is knowledge transmitted from the top or acquired from experience at the bottom? Gio Wiederhold IP havens 15
- 16. Longer term effect • Repatriation of $$ from the CFH to the US is taxed. • Current workers are paid by the CFH. US and offshore employees are unaware of the source of their paycheck The CFH acquires an increasing fraction of the IP The CFH is paid an increasing fraction of the income The CFH in time can becomes richer than the company. • It is more efficient for the company to invest in low-tax countries and create jobs there. Job losses in the U.S. increase • Eventually the CFH can buy the parent company. Control by stockholders is gone as well 18-Nov-12 CS207 16
- 17. Effects over time 18-Nov-12 CS207 17
- 18. Problems • There is a lack of trustworthy data 1. $ 209M spent [US commerce department, 2003] + 4 663 jobs lost [U.S. labor dept, 1Q04] 2. $2 400M income [Business week, in 2003] + 50 000 jobs gained [Indian NAS&S Cos, Fy04/4] • Attitudes are inconsistent Greenspan 1: IP rights have assumed increasing importance [27Feb03] Greenspan 2: Our economy is best served by full and vigorous engagement in the global economy – when defending reducing protection [11Mar03] 18-Nov-12 CS207 18
- 19. Related Intellectual capital issues Not all intellectual capital is owned, property, IP 1. Education: Services that transmit valuable, but non-proprietary knowledge to others. If receiver pays, certainly can take it anywhere If the state pays, can it / should it be reimbursed? Now not. 2. Publication: IP placed into the public domain is no longer IP Who benefits? The reader gets knowledge / The writer gets fame Society becomes more egalitarian, effective • These 2 aspects can easily confuse IP discussions 18-Nov-12 CS207 19
- 20. Flows are messy Fabless Chip Manufacturer Typical FCM Delaware MNCS MNCA FCM-D Sales One-time SG&A Design & development Cost- Buy-in IP share 6-year rights IP: pay- U.S. royalty tranche designs ments offshore U>S. FCM-H FCM-I IP use licensing International Ltd BV docu- profit Netherlands Isle of Man ments, Owns knowhow FCM-I US Ireland Offshore Revenue Revenue ~40% Chip and board manufacture offshore ~60% FCM Products OEM fabricators, US and offshore
- 21. Not all taxhavens are offshore: Delaware Formal HQ of HQ of Coca-Cola, Ford, General Motors, Google, Hewlett Packard, Intel, Kentucky Fried Chicken, Texas Instruments and 200,000 more corporations owner: Corporation Trust, a subsidiary of Wolters-Kluwer, a Dutch publishing house. 11/18/2012 CS207 [Shaxton:11] 21
- 22. Future: Outsourcing and IP export Need Increased understanding and accounting for IP exports (making them visible) To rationalize political concern by populists & traditional conservatives versus strong lobbyists pressures and globalists Correct pricing, licensing and its taxation of IP exports • will increase corporate profits in the U.S. • reduce cash in offshore accounts, more for U.S. investment • provide taxes that could be used to compensate • for R&D support provided by the government • for educational costs • for unfunded retirement benefits of workers whose IP was outsourced • Is unlikely to stop offshoring substantially • Amounts would be large in a number of cases • But …. 18-Nov-12 CS207 22
- 23. Symmetry Exports and Transfers go both ways • There is innovation everywhere • If the U.S. imports IP, the receiver should pay Basic and fundamental research in the U.S. is declining Growth was motivated by WW II experience [Vannevar Bush] Many countries now fund fundamental research The ratio of applied to basic research is increasing Industrial research is mainly applied Technological research is rarely basic Development requires more resources B F A D Industrial and management infrastructure Good in the U.S Demonstration and Beta sites - early adopters 18-Nov-12 CS207 23
- 24. Doonesbury 1/2 18-Nov-12 CS207 24
- 25. Doonsbury 2/2 18-Nov-12 CS207 25