Tax Competitiveness

Arguments and Positions

The chemical-pharmaceutical industry invests every year over 7 billion euros in Germany. This shows the commitment to the location. In order to keep it this way, the federal government needs to find answers to international tax policy developments: For example, the USA uses its tax policy for better framework conditions and thus for strengthening the US economy.

An even longer wait is harmful to Germany as an industry location, as investments will increasingly go to other places in the future. Moreover, due to the constant increase in trade tax rates (Hebesätze), the burden on enteprises has risen to up to 35 percent. This means that company taxation in Germany ranks among the highest worldwide. Also plans such as expanding the land and real estate purchase tax (Grunderwerbssteuer) to share deals of capital companies are harmful for Germany as an industrial nation. The same holds true for considerations of introducing new taxation on digital business models which would weaken the location – since this would also affect tradi-tional companies dedicated to digitalisation.

Germany is falling behind

In 2018, the US has implemented the largest tax reform of the last 30 years. Now, the business tax rate is reduced from 35 to 21 per¬cent, and there is an immediate deduction of investment. Licensing fees from cross-border digital services benefit from lower taxation (ca. 13 percent). Moreover, a special tax is charged on license and service payments from large US corporations to foreign parent companies. In consequence, the investment location Germany is left at a disadvantage.

Internationally operating companies in Germany pay a disproportionately high share of their earnings taxes in this country: According to a chemical industry survey, some businesses realise only around 20 percent of their sales in Germany, while this is where up to 60 percent of their worldwide earnings taxes become due. Add to this further tax payments due to energy taxation or real estate tax. There are also positive direct revenue effects such as the wages and salaries tax (Lohnsteuer) and the employer’s contributions to social insurance.

Burdens on companies have risen

Since the last major company tax reform back in 2008, little has been done to bring the fiscal conditions in a competitive form. Quite the contrary, political decisions resulted in further burdens. For example, the additional inclusion of income-independent elements like rent, interest, leasing or licencing fees as well as the interest barrier (Zinsschranke) clearly broadened the assessment base and make an international harmonisation of company taxation even more difficult.


  • Bring company tax law in a competitive form and cut bureaucracy
    Germany needs to modernise its company tax legislation. This includes that the taxation of foreign activities of enterprises should not be higher than the taxation of comparable domestic activities. Therefore, the trade tax should be reformed, it should be possible to offset foreign taxes in German trade tax, and the much too high “low tax country” threshold under the foreign transactions tax law (Außen¬steuergesetz) should be lowered from 25 to 15 percent; otherwise the reporting obligations will explode.
  • Cut company tax
    Germany must be able to keep pace internationally. Prerequisites for this are lower company taxation and a fiscal environment that drives forward innovation and investment in this country..
  • Avoid new burdens
    There must be no new burdens from restructuring the taxation of digital business models. Here, inter-national solutions make sense. National go-it-alone actions put strains on all undertakings which use digital business models. New burdens, especially under the guise of preventing abuse, should be avoided too. For example, also in the future the land and real estate purchase tax must not unnecessarily burden listed capital companies just to prevent forms of share deals.

For questions or suggestions, please feel free to contact us.


Chin Chin King