International Tax and Public Finance

, Volume 22, Issue 5, pp 887–907 | Cite as

US Supreme Court unanimously chooses substance over form in foreign tax credit case: implications of the PPL decision for the creditability of cash-flow taxes

  • Charles E. McLureJr.
  • Jack Mintz
  • George R. Zodrow


In a recent unanimous decision in the PPL case, the US Supreme Court ruled that a one-time retroactive British “Windfall Tax” levied on 32 public utilities that were privatized between 1984 and 1996 was eligible for the US foreign tax credit (FTC). The Court rejected the contention of the US Internal Revenue Service that eligibility for the FTC should be governed by the legislative form of the tax rather than its economic substance. This decision could have far-reaching implications for the creditability of taxes that are not ordinarily thought to be income taxes, including various cash-flow business taxes that are key elements of several proposals recommending replacement of the income tax with a consumption-based tax. This article examines these issues, arguing that one and arguably both of the most common forms of cash-flow consumption-based taxes should be creditable; it also discusses questions that remain about the interpretation of key regulatory requirements that govern creditability.


US Supreme Court PPL decision Windfall profits tax  Foreign tax credit Cash-flow tax Rent tax 

JEL Classification

H25 H8 


  1. Aaron, H. J., & Galper, H. (1985). Assessing tax reform. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.Google Scholar
  2. Alstott, A., Chirlestein, M., Desai, M., Graetz, M., Halperin, D., Kane, M., Lokken, L., Peroni, R., & Warren, A. (2013). Amici curiae brief filed (January 18, 2013) in support of respondent, PPL Corp and Subsidiaries v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, Supreme Court of the United States.Google Scholar
  3. Altshuler, R., Bird, R. M., Gillis, M., Harberger, A. C., Hufbauer, G. C., McLure, C. E. Jr., Mintz, J., & Zodrow, G. R. (2012). Amici curiae brief filed (August 8, 2012) in support of petitioners, PPL Corp and Subsidiaries v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, Supreme Court of the United States.Google Scholar
  4. Auerbach, A. J. (2008). Tax reform in the twenty-first century. In J. W. Diamond & G. R. Zodrow (Eds.), Fundamental tax reform: Issues, choices and implications (pp. 27–59). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  5. Boadway, R. W., Bruce, N., & Mintz, J. M. (1984). Taxation, inflation, and the marginal tax rate on capital for the Canadian mining industry. Canadian Journal of Economics, 17, 62–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bradford, D. F. (1986). Untangling the income tax. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bradford, D. F. (2005). A tax system for the twenty-first century. In A. J. Auerbach & K. A. Hassett (Eds.), Towards fundamental tax reform. Washington: American Enterprise Institute.Google Scholar
  8. Devereux, M. P., & Griffith, R. (1998). Taxes and the location of production: Evidence from a panel of U.S. multinationals. Journal of Public Economics, 68(3), 335–367.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Devereux, M. P., & Griffith, R. (2003). Evaluating tax policy for location decisions. International Tax and Public Finance, 10(2), 107–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Genser, B., & Reutter, A. (2007). Moving toward dual income taxation in Europe. Finanzarchiv, 63(3), 436–456.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Gesualdi, C. (2013). After PPL: How to bring congressional intent back to the foreign tax credit applicability decision. Tax Notes International, 71, 355–365.Google Scholar
  12. Goldin, J. (2012). Reconsidering substance over form in PPL. Tax Notes 137 (December 12), pp. 1229–1232.Google Scholar
  13. Grubert, H. (2005). Tax credits, source rules, trade, and electronic commerce: Behavioral margins and the design of international tax systems. Tax Law Review, 58(2), 149–190.Google Scholar
  14. Grubert, H., & Altshuler, R. (2013). Fixing the system: An analysis of alternative proposals for the reform of international tax. National Tax Journal, 66(3), 671–712.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hall, R. E., & Rabushka, A. (1995). The flat tax. Stanford, CA: Hoover Institution Press.Google Scholar
  16. Institute for Fiscal Studies. (1991). Equity for companies: A corporation tax for the 1990s. London: Institute for Fiscal Studies.Google Scholar
  17. King, M., & Fullerton, D. (1984). The taxation of income from capital. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Klemm, A. (2007). Effective average tax rates for permanent investment. IMF Working paper WP/08/56. Washington DC: International Monetary Fund.Google Scholar
  19. Land, B. C. (2010). Resource rent taxation: Theory and experience. In P. Daniel, M. Keen, & C. McPherson (Eds.), The taxation of petroleum and minerals: Principles, problems and practice. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  20. Leechor, C., & Mintz, J. (1993). On the taxation of multinational investment when the capital exporting country uses the deferral method. Journal of Public Economics, 51(1), 75–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. McLure, C. E, Jr, & Zodrow, G. R. (1996). A hybrid consumption-based tax proposed for Bolivia. International Tax and Public Finance, 3, 97–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. McLure, C. E, Jr, & Zodrow, G. R. (1998). The economic case for foreign tax credits for cash flow taxes. National Tax Journal, 51(1), 1–22.Google Scholar
  23. McLure, C. E, Jr, & Zodrow, G. R. (2007). Consumption-based direct taxes: A guided tour of the amusement park. Finanzarchiv, 63, 285–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. McLure, C. E, Jr. (2013). Reflections on the PPL decision and its implications for the creditability of cash-flow taxes. Tax Notes, 71, 141–43.Google Scholar
  25. Mintz, J. & Chen, D. (2012). Capturing economic rents through royalties and taxes. SPP Research Papers, 5(30), The School of Public Policy, University of Calgary.Google Scholar
  26. Mintz, J. (1995). The corporation tax: A survey. Fiscal Studies, 16(4), 23–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Rose, M. (1994). Tax reform in Eastern Europe: Economic concept and administrative feasibility. In O. Gans (Ed.), Policy reform and structural adjustment: The cases of Malaysia, Hungary, China, Peru and Sri Lanka (pp. 41–62). Heidelberg: Heidelberg Studies in Applied Economics and Rural Institutions.Google Scholar
  28. Rose, M., & Wiswesser, R. (1998). Tax reform in transition economies: Experiences from participating in the Croatian tax reform process of the 1990s. In P. B. Sorensen (Ed.), Public finance in a changing world. Houndmills: Macmillan Press.Google Scholar
  29. Rose, M. (1999). Recommendations on taxing income for countries in transition to market economies. In M. Rose (Ed.), Tax reform for countries in transition to market economies (pp. 23–62). Stuttgart: Lucius and Lucius.Google Scholar
  30. US Treasury. (1977). Blueprints for basic tax reform. Washington: USGPO.Google Scholar
  31. Viard, A. D. (2013). PPL: Exposing the flaws in the foreign tax credit. Tax Notes (April 29), pp. 553–566.Google Scholar
  32. Zodrow, G. R., & McLure, C. E, Jr. (1991). Implementing direct consumption taxes in developing countries. Tax Law Review, 46, 405–87.Google Scholar
  33. Zodrow, G. R. (2007). Should capital income be subject to consumption-based taxation? In H. J. Aaron, L. Burman, & C. E. Steuerle (Eds.), Taxing capital income. Washington: Urban Institute Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Charles E. McLureJr.
    • 1
  • Jack Mintz
    • 2
  • George R. Zodrow
    • 3
    • 4
  1. 1.Hoover InstitutionStanford UniversityStanfordUSA
  2. 2.School of Public PolicyUniversity of CalgaryAlbertaCanada
  3. 3.Economics Department and Baker Institute for Public PolicyRice UniversityHoustonUSA
  4. 4.Centre for Business TaxationOxford UniversityOxfordEngland, UK

Personalised recommendations