China Taxes: Serious Now And Getting Seriouser
Yes, I know seriouser is not a word, but I like the emphasis.
One of the things we are always "talking" about here is is China's increasing legalization, both in its enacting new laws and in its stepping up its legal enforcement. It seems that every month for the last year or so, China's governments have been increasing their crackdown on unregistered foreign companies. For more on this, check out my previous posts (subtly titled), "Urgent Alert -- Register Your Company in China NOW" and "Urgent Alert -- Register Your Company in China NOW, Part II." Certainly one of the primary reasons for China's increased crackdown on unregistered foreign companies is to bring those companies onto China's tax rolls.
China has a new tax law set to take effect on January 1, 2008 and I expect China's crackdown on unregistered foreign companies to continue accelerating up to and through that date. Your only solution to this is to get legal. Fast.
Yesterday's Wall Street Journal has an article warning about the new tax law's impact on companies based in countries without double-taxation agreements with China. The article is "Chinese Law May Snare Firms Based in Tax Havens," [subscription may be required] and it warns that many tax havens, including the British Virgin Islands, Barbados, and Mauritius, do not have double-taxation treaties with China, putting companies from those countries at risk of being taxed on their world-wide income under China's new tax law:
Under the new unified enterprise income-tax law, which is expected to come into effect on Jan. 1, 2008, any company that makes decisions at operations in China or effectively manages operations there could potentially be classified as a tax resident even if the company is not incorporated in China, according to Deloitte.
Companies based in the British Virgin Islands, Barbados and Mauritius, among other tax havens, are notably at risk, and potentially liable to pay China's 25% tax on world-wide income, because those centers don't have double-tax treaties with Beijing, Deloitte said.
"This seven-month window is critical," Chee Weng Lee, a partner of tax services at Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu, told a media briefing Thursday. "Companies operating in the British Virgin Islands and other centers need to look at their operations."
According to the article, China has double-tax agreements with more than 80 countries.
Get thee to thine accountant. Faster.

Comments (15)
Read through and enter the discussion by using the form at the endTherese - June 2, 2007 7:44 PM
Mauritius, really? I was under the impression that they had a DTA with China. In fact:
http://www.pwchk.com/home/eng/chinatax_news_oct2006_19.html
http://www.pwchk.com/home/eng/chinatax_news_apr2007_9.html (refers to it)
Perhaps I'm misunderstanding, though. Tax isn't my thing, and I can't access WSJ (no account at home) to read the article in full.
China Law Blog - June 2, 2007 11:24 PM
Therese --
Very interesting. So it appears we have Price Waterhouse saying there is a double taxation agreement with Mauritus and Deloitte saying there is not. Perhaps there is such an agreement, but it is not 100%?
Therese - June 3, 2007 6:28 PM
I checked this morning when I came in. Amusingly, Deloitte recently released an update on amendments to the China-Mauritius DTA which was extremely helpful and thorough (as can only be expected from Deloitte's update writers). The latest revisions to the China-Mauritius DTA allow taxes to be levied on capital gains realised in the PRC by Mauritius resident companies. Perhaps that caused the confusion.
nanheyangrouchuan - June 3, 2007 6:42 PM
Beijing smells money by increasing tax enforcement on foreigners, and for these tax havens, the issues is more seriouser.
Chris - June 3, 2007 11:49 PM
I think this is good. I know of many "shady" companies operating in China. Some are WOFE's with incorporations in many of the off shore locations.
Hopefully this will help weed out the companies taking advantage of the current "loop holes".
So, once China starts getting all the tax revenues they deserve (combined with all the other sources of big cash), can countries like the U.S. finally stop giving them aid?
Joseph Wang - June 4, 2007 11:30 AM
Actually, China is giving the US far more financial aid than the US is giving China.
Jonathan - June 4, 2007 7:46 PM
Most of these "off shore" companies were setup by Local Chinese in order to receive tax benefits that were reserved for foreign companies.
This is well known. Now thanks to the new tax regulation, these fake off-shore companies will be forbidden. Makes sense.
nanheyangrouchuan - June 5, 2007 11:00 AM
Joe Wang:
Buying US debt is needed to maintain the currency peg, not a form of aid. No US bonds = much smaller market for exports. We can discuss the Int'l Development Bank giving China 600 million USD this year for rural development while China buys fleets of Audis for gov't officials, expands its nuke arsenal, space program and continues the military build-up against Taiwan.
Joseph Wang - June 5, 2007 5:08 PM
nanheyangrouchuan: It's pumping cash into the US economy.
It's also very hard to have a discussion when I have no idea what I'm arguing against. I have no idea what the "international development bank" is and what that $600M number means, and in any event $600M is a small fraction of what the PRC spends domestically on health and welfare.
China Law Blog - June 6, 2007 11:07 PM
Therese --
Perhaps. Thanks.
China Law Blog - June 6, 2007 11:08 PM
NH --
True.
China Law Blog - June 6, 2007 11:09 PM
Chris --
Not sure I see the connection. Please explain.
China Law Blog - June 6, 2007 11:09 PM
Joseph Wang--
?????????????
China Law Blog - June 6, 2007 11:11 PM
Jonathan --
You are right. They are called round-trippers and my firm has represented a number of these companies in trying to clean up their US operations and get things right both here in the US and in China.
China Law Blog - June 6, 2007 11:12 PM
NH/Joseph Wang --
I think NH is referring to the fact that China still receives huge amounts of foreign aid.