Home
/
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
/
Explainer: the ‘global minimum tax’
Explainer: the ‘global minimum tax’
Jan 31, 2026 11:42 PM

Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen has said she plans to impose a global minimum tax on U.S. corporations, which she will coordinate with global leaders to stop “a destructive, global race to the bottom.” How will this work; what will it do to petitiveness; and is it constitutional? Here are the facts you need to know.

What is a global minimum tax?

A global minimum tax would see wealthy nations agree not to lower their tax rates on corporations that are based, or (in some proposals) do business in, their nations below a specific level. Corporations would then pay a similar or identical amount of taxes regardless of where they are located, discouraging offshoring to low or no-tax nations and encouraging higher taxes and spending. Current proposals make this collaboration between sovereign governments voluntary rather pulsory.

Why do politicians want to impose a global minimum tax?

Corporations respond to tax incentives and disincentives, just as individuals often “vote with their feet” when a state’s taxes e too high. Politicians, especially in high-tax nations, want to prevent low-tax nations from attracting “their” businesses by allowing stockholders to keep more of their profits. Yellen’s former mentor, Nobel Prize-winning economist Joseph Stiglitz, lamented that “every country thinks it can steal business from others by lowering taxes.”

Yellen has also said a global minimum tax would boost U.S. petitiveness” – after redefining the word. “Competitiveness is about more than how panies fare against panies in global merger-and-acquisition bids,” she said. “It’s about making sure that governments have stable tax systems that raise sufficient revenue to invest in essential public goods and respond to crises.” However, the IRS collected more than $3.5 trillion during the booming 2019 fiscal year – more than enough to provide for the delegated powers conferred upon the federal government by the Constitution.

How does the U.S. corporate tax pare to other nations?

Although President Donald Trump’s Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 reduced the U.S. corporate tax rate from 35% to 21%, bined federal-state corporate tax rate is already higher than the global average of 24%. President Joe Biden’s “infrastructure” plan proposes raising the U.S. corporate tax rate to 28%, with an effective rate of 32% – making the U.S. even petitive in the traditional sense.

What would the global minimum tax rate on corporations be?

No one agrees. The Biden administration wants to set the global minimum tax at 21%, our current level, while European leaders support a rate of 12.5% – the corporate tax rate of its lowest-tax nation, Ireland. European leaders seem to realize the advantage lower corporate taxes give them over the United States and seek to make them permanent.

Do higher corporate tax rates bring greater revenue?

The Laffer Curve also applies to corporate taxes: Lower taxes bring higher revenue. In 1990, the average corporate tax rate was nearly 40%, but the revenue that corporate taxes generated in the 36 wealthiest nations amounted to 2.4% of GDP. Today, with corporate tax levels at nearly half that rate, corporate tax revenues in the same countries amount to 3.1% of GDP. In the UK, corporate tax revenues are as high today as in 1985, when the rate stood at 40%. “Lower rates do not always mean lower collections,” writes Scott Hodge of the nonpartisan Tax Foundation.

How would the ‘global minimum tax’ affect the U.S. economy?

“Raising the U.S. corporate tax rate to 28 percent,as President Biden has proposed, would reduce the long-term size of our economy by 1 percent, reduce wages by 0.8 percent, and eliminate 187,000 jobs,” wrote Hodge.

How do higher corporate tax rates affect consumers and workers?

Corporate taxes get passed on to the consumer in the form of higher prices. Higher corporate tax rates discourage investment, leading employers to fire workers, delay raises, or curtail hiring. A relatively low percentage of corporate tax e from shareholders’ earnings. A team of researchers led by Northwestern University’s Scott Baker found that consumers, workers, and shareholders each absorbed approximately one-third of corporate taxes (31%, 38%, and 31%, respectively).

How would the global minimum tax be implemented?

One proposal would reward confiscatory tax policies while violating national sovereignty. The Washington Post reported in March that one plan would have the OECD establish a global minimum tax rate – and allow high-tax nations to tax overseas earnings in lower-tax nations:

For example, Hungary could maintain its existing 9 percent corporate tax rate even after the new 12 percent minimum is enacted. But under the OECD agreement, France could collect taxes on the e earned by panies in Hungary amounting to the difference between Hungary’s corporate tax rate and the 12 percent global minimum — a measure known as a “top-up” tax.

It is unclear how U.S. politicians would explain their desire to let foreign nations enrich themselves by taxing U.S.-based firms, raising consumer prices, and costing American jobs.

Is the global minimum tax constitutional?

The notion of any policy being set by a supranational governing body is ipso facto unconstitutional. However, the global minimum tax on corporations – at least, as proposed now – is being presented as an informal, voluntary agreement among members of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). Specific collection mechanisms may well violate the Constitution. Then again, any administration considering a global tax long ago turned its back on constitutional limitations on leviathan government.

How does the global minimum tax affect American democracy and U.S. voters?

Even a “voluntary” global minimum tax harms American democracy and deprives Americans of self-determination. It allows foreign nations – whom U.S. voters have not, and cannot, elected – to set the parameters of policies that could harm hundreds of millions of Americans. It immerses the views of the American people into the sea of “world opinion,” diluting democratic decisions and watering down the will of the American people with those of Eurosocialists.

What should Christians think about this?

“The power to tax is the power to destroy,” said American statesman Daniel Webster. Christians are called to use their creative capacity to build. Corporate taxes destroy jobs, lower wages, and raise prices on average Americans. Meanwhile, American citizens would lose some measure of their control over their own government – a reality alone that makes such a scheme worth opposing.

Comments
Welcome to mreligion comments! Please keep conversations courteous and on-topic. To fosterproductive and respectful conversations, you may see comments from our Community Managers.
Sign up to post
Sort by
Show More Comments
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
5 Reasons you’ll love Acton University (even if you hate conferences)
I have confession to make: I don’t like conferences. I don’t like seminars or conventions, either. I also don’t like colloquiums, symposiums, forums, or summits. I love people (really, I do) and I love discussions about ideas. But something happens when you put them together into a “conference” that causes my introverted tendencies to spike. I’m just not a conference-going kinda guy. That’s probably an odd admission to make, especially in a post in which I try to convince you...
This Eastern European nation shows how foreign investment is patriotic
At a time when populist sentiments are on the rise on both sides of the Atlantic, the leader of one former Communist nation has affirmed that free markets open acrossborders area blessing. In anew essay at Religion & Liberty Transatlantic,Mihail Neamtu, Ph.D., argues that the wealth created by foreign investment furthers the national interest. In his mentary, titled“Romania chooses prosperity over populism,”he recounts thenation’s unusually bold embrace of international capital. Urged to keepforeigners out of its economy or restricttheir investment,...
France settles for Macron and malaise
What should American citizens think of Emmanuel Macron and the impact he will have as the next president of France? His outsider status, entrenched opposition, andimprecise political platform may createthe perfect storm for France to continue marching in place, according to anew essay in Religion & Liberty Transatlantic. “The French don’t like change; they like what’s new,” writes Christophe Foltzenlogel, a jurist for the European Centre for Law and Justice (the counterpart to the ACLJ, founded by Jay Sekulow). How...
What is comparative advantage?
Note: This is post #32 in a weekly video series on basic microeconomics. What parative advantage? And why is it important to trade? In this video by Marginal Revolution University, economist Don Boudreaux guides us through a specific example surrounding Tasmania — an island off the coast of Australia that experienced the miracle of growth in reverse. Through this example we show what can happen when a civilization is deprived of trade, and show why trade is essential to economic...
The disordered soul of Frank Underwood
“Frank Underwood, masterfully played by the award-winning Kevin Spacey, embodies the corruption that so often attends to the pursuit of political power,” says Jordan Ballor in this week’s Acton Commentary, “and as the new season nears it’s worth looking back at where it all began for Francis and Claire Underwood.” In their review of the show’s first season, David Corbin and Alissa Wilkinson rightly observe that the example of Frank Underwood provides an important negative lesson about the need for...
Development malpractice: When failure in ‘doing good’ is worse than ‘doing nothing’
What happens when governments, NGOs, charities, and churches all converge in scurried attempts to alleviate global poverty, whether through wealth transfers or other top-down, systematic solutions? As films like PovertyCure and Poverty, Inc. aptly demonstrate, the results have been dismal, ranging from minimal, short-term successes to widespread, counterproductive disruption. Surely we can do better, avoiding grand, outside solutions, and ing alongside the poor as partners. Yet even amid the menu of smaller and more direct or localized “bottom-up” solutions, there...
State Department releases 2017 report on international religious freedom
The State Department recently released its International Religious Freedom Report for 2017.A wide range of U.S. government agencies and offices use the reports for such efforts as shaping policy and conducting diplomacy. The Secretary of State also uses the reports to help determine which countries have engaged in or tolerated “particularly severe violations” of religious freedom in order to designate “countries of particular concern.” A major concern addressed in this year’s report is that “international religious freedom is worsening in...
Understanding the President’s Cabinet: Attorney General
Note: This is post #16 in a weekly series of explanatory posts on the officials and agencies included in the President’s Cabinet. See the series introductionhere. Cabinet position:Attorney General Department:Department of Justice Current Secretary:Jeff Sessions Succession:The Attorney General is seventh in the presidential line of succession. Department Mission:“The Judiciary Act of 1789 created the Office of the Attorney General which evolved over the years into the head of the Department of Justice and chief law enforcement officer of the Federal...
To fight poverty, Oxfam must measure what matters
If people of faith want to reduce global poverty, they must begin by accurately measuring the problem. But a well-publicized report on international poverty distorts the problem and promotes solutions that would leave the world’s poorest people worse off, according to two free market experts. Every year, Oxfam releases a report on global wealth inequality to further the agenda of the World Economic Forum. This year’s entry, titled “An economy for the 99 percent,” was released with the headline: “Just...
Federalist Society’s Leonard Leo speaks at Acton May 11 on the ‘Trump judges’ and Supreme Court
pictured: Leonard Leo With Neil Gorsuch elected to the Supreme Court in mid April, and a slate of other candidates on Trump’s radar for the lower courts, there is a mitment by the Trump administration to the election of conservative appointees to the federal judiciary. Could this be a judicial renaissance of sorts? Will there be a resurgence of true conservatism and originalism in the courts? To find e join us on Thursday May 11 at Acton’s headquarters in Grand...
Related Classification
Copyright 2023-2026 - www.mreligion.com All Rights Reserved