Tax Professional usually responds in minutes
Our tax advisers are all verified
Unlimited follow-up questions
Italy is revisiting its controversial digital services tax (DST) to address objections raised by the United States.
This move is part of broader international efforts to harmonise tax policies for the digital economy.
Italy’s DST imposes a 3% levy on revenues generated by tech companies from digital services provided within the country.
While it targets major players like Google and Amazon, critics argue it unfairly singles out US companies.
The U.S. views Italy’s DST as discriminatory and has threatened to impose tariffs on Italian goods in retaliation.
This has prompted Italy to explore changes that align more closely with global tax standards, such as the OECD’s proposed framework.
Proposed amendments include narrowing the scope of the DST and aligning it with the global minimum tax rate.
These changes aim to reduce tensions with the US while ensuring Italy continues to benefit from taxing the digital economy.
Italy’s efforts to reform its web tax reflect the growing need for international cooperation in taxing the digital economy.
Striking a balance between national interests and global standards will be key.
If you have any queries about this article on Italy’s digital services tax reforms, or tax matters in Italy, then please get in touch.
Alternatively, if you are a tax adviser in Italy and would be interested in sharing your knowledge and becoming a tax native, then there is more information on membership here.
The ongoing battle over Digital Services Tax (DST) has put Ireland in a tough position.
With the European Union (EU) pushing for a tax on digital services provided by large tech companies, Ireland must decide where it stands—supporting the EU or maintaining strong ties with the United States, home to many of these tech giants.
The US government views these taxes as discriminatory because they primarily target American firms like Google, Facebook, and Amazon.
The DST is a tax levied on the revenues generated by large multinational digital companies that provide services such as social media, online advertising, and e-commerce platforms.
These taxes aim to address the gap where companies generate large revenues from countries where they have no physical presence, meaning they often pay minimal taxes.
The EU has been pushing for a 3% DST across its member states, with many countries already implementing it on a national level.
Ireland, as a key hub for US tech companies in Europe, finds itself at the heart of this debate.
Ireland is home to the European headquarters of major tech companies like Facebook, Google, and Apple (for our recent article on the EU’s ruling on Apple – see here).
These companies have set up in Ireland largely due to the country’s 12.5% corporate tax rate and other favourable tax policies.
The US has raised concerns that the DST unfairly targets American companies and could lead to retaliatory tariffs.
While the EU is keen on creating a unified DST, Ireland is balancing its economic dependence on the US tech sector with its obligations as an EU member.
Ireland’s decision will have significant consequences for its relationship with both the US and its EU partners.
Ireland faces a complex decision in the US-EU DST standoff. Its role as a tech hub makes it crucial to these discussions, and whatever path it chooses will shape its tax landscape for years to come.
If you have any queries about this article on Digital Services Tax, or tax matters in Ireland, then please get in touch.
Alternatively, if you are a tax adviser in Ireland and would be interested in sharing your knowledge and becoming a tax native, then please get in touch. There is more information on membership here.
India has introduced new Goods and Services Tax (GST) regulations targeting e-commerce platforms.
The updates include stricter rules around GST collection at source (TCS) and increased penalties for non-compliance.
This is part of India’s broader effort to improve tax compliance and ensure that digital businesses operating in the country are meeting their tax obligations.
GST (Goods and Services Tax) is a comprehensive tax applied to the sale of goods and services in India. TCS (Tax Collected at Source) is a system where the e-commerce platform collects GST on behalf of sellers and then remits it to the government. This ensures that tax is collected at the point of sale, reducing the risk of evasion.
India’s latest GST updates include:
India’s digital economy has been growing rapidly, and the government is keen to ensure that all businesses, including those operating online, pay their fair share of taxes.
The new GST rules are designed to close loopholes that some e-commerce platforms have used to reduce their tax liabilities.
Platforms like Amazon India, Flipkart, and other digital services will need to review their tax compliance procedures.
The increased reporting requirements may result in higher administrative costs for these companies, but they are also likely to reduce the risk of tax audits and penalties.
India’s new GST regulations for e-commerce platforms represent a significant step towards improving tax compliance in the digital economy.
These changes will ensure that online businesses contribute fairly to the tax system while making it harder for companies to evade their obligations.
If you have any queries about this article on India’s GST update, or tax matters in India, then please get in touch.
Alternatively, if you are a tax adviser in India and would be interested in sharing your knowledge and becoming a tax native, then please get in touch. There is more information on membership here.
A Digital Services Tax (DST) is a tax imposed on revenues earned by large multinational companies from providing digital services in a particular country.
It targets companies that offer online services such as advertising, social media platforms, and online marketplaces.
DSTs have been introduced by several countries as a way to ensure that tech giants like Google, Facebook, and Amazon pay their fair share of taxes in the countries where they generate profits, even if they don’t have a physical presence there.
The Digital Services Tax is typically levied as a percentage of the revenue a company earns from digital services provided to users in the country that imposes the tax.
For example, a DST might charge a 3% tax on the revenue a company earns from online advertising or user data collection.
Unlike traditional corporate taxes, which are based on a company’s profits, the DST is based on revenue.
This means that even if a company isn’t making a profit in a given year, it will still have to pay the DST on the revenue it generates from digital services.
The DST usually applies to large multinational tech companies that generate significant revenue from digital services.
Most countries that have introduced a DST apply it to companies with global revenues above a certain threshold, often €750 million or more.
For example, the UK’s DST applies to companies that earn more than £500 million in global revenues, with at least £25 million coming from UK-based users.
It should be noted that the UK has undertaken to withdraw this tax with the introduction of the OECD’s Pillar Two under the BEPS project.
The DST was introduced in response to concerns that large tech companies were not paying enough tax in the countries where they generate significant revenue.
Because these companies often operate online, they don’t need a physical presence in a country to make money, which means they can avoid paying local taxes by basing their operations in low-tax jurisdictions.
The DST ensures that these companies contribute to the tax base of the countries where they earn their revenue, even if they don’t have offices or employees there.
The Digital Services Tax is a response to the challenges posed by the digital economy.
By taxing revenue rather than profits, the DST ensures that large tech companies pay their fair share of taxes in the countries where they operate, even if they don’t have a physical presence there.
This tax is seen as a temporary measure while global tax reforms, like the OECD’s Pillar One are being finalised.
If you have any queries about this artilce or international tax matters in general, then please get in touch.
Australia is updating its Goods and Services Tax (GST) rules, with a focus on cross-border digital services.
These changes require foreign companies that provide digital services to Australian consumers—such as streaming platforms, software providers, and online content services—to register for GST and collect the tax from their customers.
Under the new rules, any company that provides digital services to Australian consumers must:
This new regulation expands the scope of GST to cover not only goods but also digital services, meaning companies like Netflix, Spotify, and Amazon Web Services will all be subject to the tax.
Australia’s digital economy has grown rapidly in recent years, with many Australians using streaming services, software subscriptions, and other online platforms.
However, foreign companies that provide these services have been able to avoid paying Australian taxes because they do not have a physical presence in the country.
These new rules are designed to close this loophole and ensure that all businesses operating in Australia’s digital market contribute to the country’s tax base.
For foreign companies, these new rules will increase administrative costs as they will need to set up systems to collect and remit GST.
Companies that do not comply with the new regulations may face penalties or fines from the ATO.
On the other hand, this move will help level the playing field for domestic digital service providers, who already have to pay GST on their services.
Australia’s decision to extend GST to cross-border digital services is part of a broader trend towards taxing the digital economy.
These changes will ensure that foreign companies contribute fairly to the Australian tax system, while also boosting the government’s revenue from the rapidly growing digital sector.
If you have any queries about this article on Australia’s GST rules for digital services, or tax matters in Australia, then please get in touch.
Alternatively, if you are a tax adviser in Australia and would be interested in sharing your knowledge and becoming a tax native, then please get in touch.
There is more information on membership here.
A digital services tax (DST) is a tax on revenue generated by large tech companies from online services, such as advertising and data collection.
Many countries have introduced DSTs in recent years to ensure that big tech companies, like Google and Facebook, pay their fair share of taxes in the countries where they operate.
Canada recently enacted its own Digital Services Tax Act, which imposes a 3% tax on revenue earned by large tech companies from digital services provided to Canadian users.
Canada introduced the Digital Services Tax because it felt that big tech companies were not paying enough tax in Canada.
These companies often base their operations in low-tax countries but generate significant revenue from Canadian users.
By introducing the DST, Canada hopes to ensure that these companies contribute to the Canadian economy.
The DST applies to companies with global revenues of more than $1 billion and Canadian revenues of more than $40 million.
The tax is levied on revenue from online advertising, data collection, and digital platforms that allow users to interact, such as social media networks.
Under the new law, large tech companies must pay a 3% tax on the revenue they generate from Canadian users.
This tax is calculated based on the company’s total global revenue and the proportion of that revenue earned in Canada.
For example, if a company earns $100 million in revenue from Canadian users, it would owe $3 million in DST to the Canadian government.
This tax is separate from the company’s regular corporate tax obligations.
The introduction of the DST has been controversial, particularly among big tech companies.
Many of these companies argue that they already pay corporate taxes in the countries where they are based and that the DST amounts to double taxation.
Some companies have even threatened to pass the cost of the tax on to Canadian users by raising prices for their services.
Despite these concerns, Canada has pushed ahead with the tax, arguing that it is necessary to ensure that tech companies contribute their fair share to the Canadian economy.
Canada’s Digital Services Tax is part of a global trend towards taxing digital services.
While it has been met with resistance from tech companies, the tax is expected to generate significant revenue for the Canadian government.
For tech companies, this means they will need to adapt to a new era of taxation that ensures they pay their fair share in the countries where they operate.
If you have any queries about this article on Canada Enacts Digital Services Tax Act, or tax matters in Canada more generally, then please get in touch.
On June 20, 2024, Bill C-59 received royal assent, enacting Canada’s Digital Services Tax Act (DST Act). The DST Act came into force on June 28, 2024, following an order by the Governor General in Council.
The DST applies to large businesses, both foreign and domestic, that meet two revenue thresholds:
The taxpayer or its consolidated group must earn total revenue from all sources of €750,000,000 or more in a fiscal year ending in a particular calendar year. Meeting this threshold qualifies the taxpayer or group for the DST in the subsequent calendar.
The taxpayer or its consolidated group must earn more than CA$20,000,000 of Canadian in-scope revenue in the calendar year. If a taxpayer earns more than CA$10,000,000 of Canadian in-scope revenue, it must register for the DST even if no DST is payable.
If the taxpayer is part of a consolidated group, these thresholds are calculated on a group basis.
The DST applies to four categories of in-scope revenues:
Revenue from providing access to or use of an online marketplace, commissions from facilitating supplies between users, and premium services related to the online marketplace. Revenue from selling one’s own inventory is excluded.
Revenue from facilitating the delivery of online targeted advertisements and providing digital space for such advertisements. Contextual advertisements not based on user data are excluded.
Revenue from providing access to or use of a social media platform, premium services, and facilitating specific interactions between users or with user-generated content. Revenue from providing access to the platform’s own digital content is excluded.
Revenue from the sale or licensing of data gathered from users of an online marketplace, social media platform, or online search engine. Revenue from data not collected by the taxpayer or its group is excluded, as are services reliant on user data like consulting or business advisory services.
Revenue classified under multiple categories will only fall into one stream to prevent double taxation under the DST Act.
For further details, refer to the Department of Finance’s Explanatory Notes .
The DST is levied at a rate of 3%.
The DST is retroactively applied to in-scope revenues earned since January 1, 2022.
Taxpayers meeting the DST thresholds and liable to pay the 3% DST must file annual tax returns and pay any tax owed by June 30 of the year following the calendar year in which the revenue was earned.
If you have any queries on the New Canada Digital Services Tax, or Canadian tax matters more generally, then please get in touch.
On 28 June 2024, the Digital Services Tax Act (DSTA) officially came into effect following an Order in Council (OIC) issued that same day.
The DSTA was enacted by Parliament as part of Bill C-59 on June 20, 2024.
Bill C-59 stipulated that the DSTA, along with its accompanying regulations and any related amendments, would come into force on a date determined by the Governor in Council.
The OIC was issued on 28 June 2024 but was only made available online on the 3 July.
Typically, Orders in Council are posted within three business days and later published in the Royal Gazette.
The DSTA introduces a 3% tax on certain types of revenue, specifically from “online marketplace services,” “online advertising services,” “social media services,” and “user data,” as defined within the Act.
This tax applies to both individual entities and consolidated groups that generate more than €750 million in global revenue.
An annual deduction of $20 million is available to be shared proportionately among entities within a consolidated group, meaning that the 3% tax is levied on applicable revenue exceeding $20 million.
The tax is retroactive, covering revenue from 1 January 2022, through the end of 2024, with the first payment and return due on June 30, 2025.
Entities with $10 million or more of in-scope revenue must register under the DSTA by January 31, 2025, provided they also meet the €750 million global revenue threshold.
For more details on the DST, then please see our separate FAQs on the tax.
Many essential elements of the DSTA are contained within its regulations, granting the government the flexibility to make significant adjustments, such as modifying the tax rate or removing retroactive application to 2022, without requiring parliamentary approval.
This could be a strategic response to potential retaliatory tariffs or other measures from the United States, which has raised concerns about the discriminatory nature of the DSTA.
The implementation of the Digital Services Tax Act marks a significant step in taxing digital economy revenues.
With its retroactive application and broad scope, the DSTA could face challenges and adjustments in the near future, particularly in response to international reactions.
if you have any queries about this article on the New Digital Services Tax Act in Canada, or Canadian tax matters more generally, then please get in touch.
The California State Assembly took a significant step by incorporating a digital advertising tax into legislation with A.B. 2829, an act initially focused on property tax.
This amendment, effective from 1 January 2025, positions California alongside Maryland as states pioneering the taxation of digital advertisements, although it simultaneously steers them into contentious legal waters.
A.B. 2829 sets a flat tax rate of 5% on the gross revenues generated from digital advertising services within California. This contrasts with Maryland’s variable tax rate but maintains the threshold for applicability to entities boasting at least $100 million in global annual gross revenue.
The bill adopts a broad definition of “digital advertising services” akin to Maryland’s, encompassing various forms of digital advertisements such as banner ads, search engine advertising, and more. It also mirrors Maryland’s exclusion of services on platforms owned by broadcast or news media entities.
Reflecting on the Maryland precedent, the California proposal is anticipated to face legal challenges under several constitutional grounds, including potential violations of the Internet Tax Freedom Act, Commerce Clause, Due Process Clause, and First Amendment.
Similar to Maryland’s approach, the bill seeks to prevent companies from directly transferring the tax burden onto customers purchasing digital advertising services through separate fees or surcharges.
This aspect is currently a point of litigation in Maryland, suggesting a likely battleground for California’s proposal as well.
The adoption of A.B. 2829 signals California’s intent to tap into the lucrative digital advertising market for tax revenue, a move reflecting growing scrutiny over the economic influence of digital platforms.
However, this initiative places California on a collision course with federal laws and constitutional protections, echoing the ongoing legal dispute over Maryland’s digital advertising tax.
Legal experts anticipate that California’s digital advertising tax will encounter lawsuits challenging its constitutionality, drawing from the legal arguments presented in Maryland’s ongoing litigation.
These challenges could center on federal preemption issues, such as the Internet Tax Freedom Act’s prohibition against discriminatory taxes on electronic commerce, and constitutional concerns related to interstate commerce, due process, and free speech.
California’s legislative amendment to introduce a digital advertising tax with A.B. 2829 marks a bold foray into uncharted legal territory, mirroring Maryland’s contentious tax measure.
As California braces for potential legal battles, the outcome of Maryland’s case could serve as a bellwether for the future of digital advertising taxation in the United States. Stakeholders, including tech giants, advertisers, and legal observers, will be watching closely as California navigates the complex interplay of state taxation, federal law, and constitutional rights in the digital age.
If you have any queries about the proposed California Digital Advertising Tax, or US tax matters more generally, then please get in touch.
In a significant development for digital commerce, the Cabinet of Japan has proposed tax reform bills aiming to revamp the current tax regime to better accommodate the burgeoning digital economy.
Submitted to the Japanese National Diet on 2 February 2024, these reforms are particularly focused on taxing platform operators involved in providing digital services from outside Japan, marking a pivotal change in the application of the Japanese consumption tax (JCT).
The Japanese consumption tax, a value-added tax levied on a wide array of goods and services, previously exempted services provided from outside Japan.
However, the rapid growth of the digital economy and the substantial provision of digital services to Japanese consumers from abroad necessitated a revision of this policy.
Starting from October 2015, digital services delivered via the internet to businesses or consumers in Japan were subjected to JCT, encompassing:
The move to impose taxation on platform operators comes in response to the challenges in ensuring tax compliance by nonresident providers of e-services, highlighted by incidents where prominent online service providers failed to meet their JCT obligations.
Under the new legislation, certain platform operators will be taxed with JCT as if they were the direct providers of digital services.
This applies to platforms facilitating e-services to Japanese consumers, with specific criteria set to identify which operators fall under this taxation scheme.
Designation as a “specified platform operator” by the Commissioner of the National Tax Agency of Japan is contingent on the total amount of consideration for e-services provided in Japan through the platform exceeding JPY 5 billion in a fiscal year.
Once designated, a platform operator is publicly announced and required to notify nonresident service providers of their status, with the designation becoming effective six months post-announcement.
This move essentially shifts the JCT liability from the nonresident service providers to the platform operators themselves, simplifying tax obligations for services targeted predominantly at businesses.
Assuming the Diet passes the tax reform bills, the new taxation on platform operators would be effective from April 1, 2025.
Platform operators meeting the specified criteria are obligated to report by September 30, 2024, with designations expected to be finalized by the end of that year.
This reform anticipates that major platform operators will be classified as “specified platform operators,” necessitating adjustments in how JCT is calculated and collected for digital services. Both platform operators and nonresident e-service providers will need to establish mechanisms to comply with the new JCT obligations, ensuring timely tax return filings and payments.
Japan’s initiative to tax digital platform operators reflects a global trend of adapting tax laws to the realities of the digital economy.
This reform not only aims to enhance tax revenue integrity but also to simplify the tax compliance process for digital services provided to Japanese consumers.
As the November 2024 ballot approaches, stakeholders within the digital commerce ecosystem will closely monitor the developments, preparing for a significant shift in Japan’s tax landscape.
If you have any queries about this article, or Japanese tax matters in general, then please get in touch.