Not Just for Americans: The Case for Expanding Reciprocal Tax Exemptions for Foreign Investments by Pension Funds
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
From provision of OAS, GIS and CPP to the favourable taxation of Registered Pension Plans and RRSPs , Canada’s government has long focused policy efforts on better ensuring that working Canadians approach retirement with sufficient income supports in place. If the government wants to continue to move in this direction by trying to help maximize returns to pension plan members, while decreasing the portfolio risks faced by those pension plans, one step it could consider would be: Expanding the exemption for withholding taxes on foreign dividends and interest earned by pension plans. The exemptions for foreign interest and dividends are already available to U.S. investments, part of a reciprocal arrangement spelled out in the Canada-U.S. Tax Convention. Those exemptions allow U.S. and Canadian pension funds to participate in cross-border investments that would otherwise be too costly. Pension funds rely on international investments to optimize diversification and returns. And tax conventions between countries are typically designed to protect investors from the participating countries from being double taxed by both their resident country and the foreign jurisdiction where they invest. This good policy has certainly been Canada’s model in its numerous bilateral tax treaties. But while the U.S.-Canada Tax Convention extends the benefit of tax exemption to dividends and interest earned from cross-border investments by tax-exempt pension funds, when it comes to all other countries, there is no equivalent result. Yet, aspects of these same exemptions exist in certain bilateral treaties between other countries in treaties with one another. That certainly suggests that there are other trading partners, besides just the U.S., that are open to the possibility of these particular exemptions. If Canada could negotiate broadening these exemptions to countries beyond the United States, it would realize important advantages with little cost. By not moving further in this direction for non-U.S. foreign interest and dividend income of Canadian pension funds, these funds are left with lower benefits or higher contribution rates for pension plan members. It is also inevitably distorting the investment decisions being made by pension fund managers, producing a negative impact on risk-adjusted returns to their portfolios. While Canada may lose some revenue by forsaking some withholding tax, that would almost certainly be outweighed by the total economic gains as pension returns increase and, in reciprocal arrangements, Canada becomes more welcoming to foreign capital. With a number of countries already evidently open to the idea of tax exemptions for foreign interest and dividends earned by pension funds, and the economic effects for doing so overwhelmingly positive, the Canadian government should seriously consider getting started on negotiating reciprocal arrangements for cross-border pension fund investment with other countries.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,021 | 0,035 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,013 | 0,015 |
| Communication savante | 0,014 | 0,014 |
| Science ouverte | 0,003 | 0,006 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,017 | 0,027 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,017 | 0,002 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».