Countries tried to use trade taxes to dodge the new 15% global corporate tax, but some tiny, boring customs laws just blocked them.
March 20, 2026
Original Paper
Taxes vs. Tariffs in a Post-Pillar Two World: A Legal-Accounting Analysis
SSRN · 6313879
The Takeaway
One might assume a low-tax country could simply replace a 15% corporate tax with a 15% tariff to help its local companies. However, because international customs values are fixed at the moment of import while corporate taxes allow for year-end adjustments, this 'swap' actually results in a double-tax penalty that makes substitution legally and economically impossible.
From the abstract
Pillar Two introduced a minimum effective tax rate of 15% for large multinationals. Yet only income taxes count as "covered taxes" under the GloBE Model Rules; tariffs, excise duties, and indirect levies are explicitly excluded. This raises a practical question: can states rely on tariffs as substitute policy instruments, now that low corporate tax rates trigger top-up taxation? This article argues that such substitution is neither legally viable nor economically effective. Transfer pricing lies