Zararlı Tercihli Vergi Rejimlerinin Bir Türü Olarak Fikri Mülkiyet Kutuları: OECD BEPS Eylem 5 Perspektifinden Bir Değerlendirme

Yıl 2025, Cilt: 17 Sayı: 33, 683 - 705, 09.12.2025

Merve Yolal

https://doi.org/10.20990/kilisiibfakademik.1766940

Öz

Küresel vergi rekabeti özellikle yüksek mobiliteye sahip fikri mülkiyet gelirleri üzerinden yürütülen stratejilerle giderek daha karmaşık bir hal almıştır. Bu stratejilerin merkezinde yer alan fikri mülkiyet kutusu (FM kutusu) rejimleri, zararlı tercihli vergi rejimlerinin bir türü olarak çok uluslu şirketlerin kârlarını düşük vergili yargı bölgelerine kaydırmalarını kolaylaştıran araçlar haline gelmiştir. OECD bu tür uygulamaları “zararlı tercihli vergi rejimleri” kapsamında değerlendirerek, BEPS (Base Erosion and Profit Shifting) projesi çerçevesinde Eylem 5 ile düzenlemeye tabi tutmuştur. Bu çalışma, fikri mülkiyet kutusu (FM kutusu) rejimlerini zararlı tercihli vergi uygulamaları kapsamında ele alarak OECD’nin BEPS Eylem 5 düzenlemeleri çerçevesinde değerlendirmeyi amaçlamaktadır. Çalışmada, FM kutuları zararlı tercihli vergi rejimlerinin bir türü olarak ele alınmakta ve OECD’nin getirdiği düzenleyici mekanizmalar üzerinden bu rejimlerin uluslararası vergi politikaları açısından etkileri değerlendirilmiştir. Çalışmadan elde edilen temel bulgular, OECD düzenlemelerinin ardından ülkelerin ulusal vergi politikalarını olumlu yönde değiştirmeleri konusunda etkili olduğu yönündedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Zararlı Vergi Rekabeti , Kurumlar Vergisi , Fikri Mülkiyet Hakları

Intellectual Property Boxes as a Type of Harmful Preferential Tax Regime: An Evaluation from the Perspective of OECD BEPS Action 5

Öz

Global tax competition has become increasingly complex, particularly through strategies involving income from intellectual property (IP), which is characterized by high mobility. At the core of these strategies lie intellectual property box (IP box) regimes, which have evolved into instruments that facilitate the shifting of profits by multinational enterprises to low-tax jurisdictions. These regimes are considered a form of harmful preferential tax practices. The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) has classified such practices under the category of “harmful preferential tax regimes” and addressed them through Action 5 of the Base Erosion and Profit Shifting (BEPS) initiative. This study aims to examine IP box regimes within the framework of harmful preferential tax practices and to evaluate them in light of the OECD’s regulatory measures introduced under BEPS Action 5. It considers IP boxes as a subtype of harmful preferential tax regimes and assesses their implications for international tax policy through the lens of the OECD’s regulatory mechanisms. The study underscores the importance of international alignment and the incorporation of economic substance in the design of tax incentives.The main findings from the study suggest that OECD regulations have been effective in encouraging countries to positively adjust their national tax policies.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Harmful Tax Competition , Corporate Income Tax , Intellectual Property Rights

Kaynakça

• Alstadsæter, A., Barrios, S., Nicodeme, G., Skonieczna, A.M. & Vezzani, A. (2018). Patent boxes design, patents location, and local R&D. Economic Policy, 33(93), 131–177. DOI:10.1093/epolic/eix021
• Armağan, R. & İçmen, M. (2012). Vergi rekabeti ve Türkiye’ye yansıması. Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 17(2), 145-172. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/download/article-file/194398
• Asen, E. (2019, September 18). OECD tackling harmful tax practices. https://taxfoundation.org/blog/oecd-harmful-tax-practices-base-erosion-profit-shifting/
• Bornemann, T. & Osswald, B. (2020). The effect of intellectual property boxes on innovative activity & effective tax rates. WU International Taxation Research Paper Series, No.3
• Böhm, T., Karkinsky, T. & Riedel, N. (2012). The impact of corporate taxes on R&D and patent holdings. https://conference.nber.org/confer/2012/TAPES12/Boehm_Karkinsky_Riedel.pdf
• Bösenberg, S. & Egger, P. H. (2017). R&D tax incentives and the emergence and trade of ideas. Economic Policy, 32(89), 39-80. https://doi.org/10.1093/epolic/eiw017
• Bradley, S., Dauchy, E. & Robinson, L. (2015). Cross-country evidence on the preliminary effects of patent box regimes on patent activity and ownership. National Tax Journal, 68(4), 1047-1071. DOI:10.17310/ntj.2015.4.07
• Cole, A. & Kallen, C. (2023, August 30). Risks to the US tax base from pillar two. https://taxfoundation.org/research/all/federal/global-minimum-tax-us-tax-base/
• Declercq, F. (2021, October 12). A closer look at France’s patent box regime. https://www.managingip.com/article/2a5bqtj8ume32iwlaoy16/a-closer-look-at-frances-patentbox-regime
• de Rassenfosse, G. (2015). Patent box policies. Commonwealth of Australia Department of Industry, Innovation and Science. https://www.industry.gov.au/sites/default/files/May%202018/document/pdf/patent_box_policies.pdf
• Dischinger, M. & Riedel, N. (2011). Corporate taxes and the location of intangible assets within multinational firms. Journal of Public Economics, 95(7-8), 691-707. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2010.12.002
• Dommergues, L. & Boudot, A. (2019). The new French IP box regime. https://www.gmbaallinial.com/mag-expert/tax-alert-the-new-french-ip-box-regime
• Evers, L., Miller, H. & Spengel, C. (2015). Intellectual property box regimes: effective tax rates and tax policy considerations. International Tax and Public Finance, 22(3), 502–530. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10797-014-9328-x
• Ernst, C. & Spengel, C. (2011). Taxation, R&D tax incentives and patent application in Europe. ZEW Discussion Papers, No.24. ftp://ftp.zew.de/pub/zew-docs/dp/dp11024.pdf
• Ernst, C., Richter, K. & Riedel, N. (2014). Corporate taxation and the quality of research and development. International Tax and Public Finance, 21(4), 694-719. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10797-014-9315-2
• Eroğlu, O. (2025). Küresel matrah erozyonuna karşı geliştirilen kurallar çerçevesinde dijital ekonomide Türk vergi sistemi. Anadolu Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 26(2), 471-501. https://doi.org/10.53443/anadoluibfd.1594037
• Eser, L. Y. & Şenel, K. (2021). İnovasyona yönelik vergi politikası: patent box rejimi. Uluslararası Ekonomik Araştırmalar Dergisi, 7(1), 17-36. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/download/article-file/1522045
• Gaessler, F., Hall, B. H. & Harhoff, D. (2019). Should there be lower taxes on patent income? NBER Working Paper Series, No.24843. https://www.nber.org/system/files/working_papers/w24843/w24843.pdf
• Giray, F. (2005). Küreselleşme sürecinde vergi rekabeti ve boyutları. Akdeniz İİBF Dergisi, 3(9), 93-122. https://dergipark.org.tr/en/download/article-file/1123227
• Gravelle, J. (2013). Tax havens: international tax avoidance and evasion. Congressional Research Service. https://sgp.fas.org/crs/misc/R40623.pdf
• Griffith, R., Miller, H. & O'Connell, M. (2014). Ownership of intellectual property and corporate taxation. Journal of Public Economics, 112, 12-23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2014.01.009
• Guenther, G. (2017). Patent boxes: a primer. Congressional Research Service CRS Report. https://www.congress.gov/crs_external_products/R/PDF/R44829/R44829.3.pdf
• Haufler, A. & Schindler, D. (2023). Attracting profit shifting or fostering innovation? On patent boxes and R&D subsidies. European Economic Review, 155, 104446. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euroecorev.2023.104446
• Haupt, A. & Peters, W. (2005). Restricting preferential tax regimes to avoid harmful tax competition. Regional Science and Urban Economics, 35(5), 493-507. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.regsciurbeco.2004.07.002
• Hebous, S. (2021). Corporate Income Taxes under Pressure: Why Reform is Needed and How it Could be Designed? In De Mooij R.A., Klemm, A.D. & Perry V.J. (Eds.), Has tax competition become less harmful? (pp. 87-106). International Monetary Fund.
• Huld, A. (2023, August 14). China’s tax incentives for the manufacturing sector in 2023. https://www.china-briefing.com/news/china-preferential-tax-policies-for-manufacturing-sector/
• İşler, İ. (2019). Global bir sorun: küresel vergi rekabeti. Vergi Raporu, 27(238), 23-39. https://vergiraporu.com.tr/upImage/org/20dcbbc.pdf
• Johansson, Å., Heady, C., Arnold, J., Brys, B. & Vartia, L. (2008). Taxation and Economic Growth. OECD Economics Department Working Papers, No.620. https://dx.doi.org/10.1787/241216205486
• Karkinsky, T. & Riedel, N. (2012). Corporate taxation and the choice of patent location within multinational firms. Journal of International Economics, 88(1), 176-185. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jinteco.2012.04.002
• Lester, J. (2022). An intellectual property box for Canada: why and how. C.D. Howe Institute e-Brief, No.326. https://ssrn.com/abstract=4393311
• Littlewood, M. (2004). Tax competition: harmful to whom? Michigan Journal of International Law, 26(1), 410-487. https://repository.law.umich.edu/mjil/vol26/iss1/
• Mengden, A. (2025, July 15). Patent box regimes in Europe, 2025. Tax Foundation. https://taxfoundation.org/data/all/eu/patent-box-regimes-europe/
• Monsenego, J. (2021, January 20). The new IP box regime in France. https://delsol-lawyers.com/The-new-IP-Box-regime-in-France
• PwC (2012). Innovation: IP structuring considerations for multinationals. Global R&D Tax News, No.4. https://www.pwc.com.tr/tr/ar-ge/yayinlar/pwc-ip-structuring-considerationsmultinationals_january_2012.pdf
• Royalty Range (2020, April 14). Patent Box in Europe. https://www.royaltyrange.com/resources/patentbox-in-europe/
• Rowe-Brown, M. & James, H. (2020). Patent Box Evaluation. HMRC. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5faad17ce90e075c4b5c94ac/Evaluation_report_-_Patent_Box.pdf
• Sakar, A. Y. (2015). Innovation for a new tax incentive: patent box regime Turkey and the EU application. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 195(3), 544-553. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.06.269
• Sanz Gomez, R. (2015). The OECD's nexus approach to IP boxes: a European Union law perspective. WU International Taxation Research Paper Series, No.12. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2589065
• Schwab, T. & Todtenhaupt, M. (2021). Thinking outside the box: The cross-border effect of tax cuts on R&D. Journal of Public Economics, 204, 104536. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2021.104536
• Shehaj, P. & Weichenrieder, A. J. (2024). Corporate income tax, IP boxes and the location of R&D. International Tax and Public Finance, 31(1), 203-242. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10797-023-09812-x
• Silva-Gámez, A. I., Méndez-Prado, S. M. & Arauz, A. (2022). What’s happening with the patent box regimes? A Systematic Review. Sustainability, 14(18), 11423. https://doi.org/10.3390/su141811423
• Sun, Z., Lei, Z., Wright, B. D., Cohen, M. & Liu, T. (2021). Government targets, end-of-year patenting rush and innovative performance in China. Nature Biotechnology, 39(9), 1068-1075. DOI: 10.1038/s41587-021-01035-x
• OECD (1998). Harmful tax competition: an emerging global issue. OECD Publishing. https://www.oecd.org/en/publications/harmful-tax-competition_9789264162945-en.html
• OECD (2013). Addressing base erosion and profit shifting. OECD Publishing. https://www.oecd.org/en/publications/addressing-base-erosion-and-profitshifting_9789264192744-en.html
• OECD (2021). Tax challenges arising from the digitalisation of the economy – global anti-base erosion model rules (pillar two). OECD Publishing. https://www.oecd.org/en/publications/tax-challenges-arising-from-digitalisation-of-the-economy-global-anti-base-erosion-model-rules-pillar-two_782bac33-en.html
• OECD (2025a). Base erosion and profit shifting (BEPS). https://www.oecd.org/en/topics/base-erosion-and-profit-shifting-beps.html#beps-actions
• OECD (2025b). Harmful tax practices. https://www.oecd.org/en/topics/harmful-tax-practices.html
• OECD (2025c). OECD releases latest peer review results on preferential tax regimes under BEPS Action 5. https://www.oecd.org/en/about/news/announcements/2025/02/oecd-releases-latest-peer-review-results-on-preferential-tax-regimes-under-beps-action-5.html
• OECD (2025d). BEPS multilateral instrument. https://www.oecd.org/en/topics/beps-multilateral-instrument.html
• OECD (2025e). Tax challenges arising from the digitalisation of the economy – consolidated commentary to the global anti-base erosion model rules. OECD Publishing. https://www.oecd.org/en/publications/tax-challenges-arising-from-the-digitalisation-of-the-economy-consolidated-commentary-to-the-global-anti-base-erosion-model-rules-2025_a551b351-en.html
• OECD (2025f). Harmful tax practices - consolidated peer review results inclusive framework on BEPS: action 5. OECD Publishing. https://www.oecd.org/en/publications/harmful-tax-practices-2018-progress-report-on-preferentialregimes_9789264311480-en.html
• Orkunoğlu Şahin, I. F. & Yereli, A. B. (2016). Seçilmiş AB ülkelerinde ve Türkiye’de patent gelirlerine ilişkin vergileme: patent box rejimi. Sosyoekonomi, 24(29), 183-203. https://doi.org/10.17233/se.2016.07.001
• Zhe, Z. (2020). The construction of. Academic Journal of Humanities & Social Sciences, 3(1), 123-132
• WIPO (2020). What is intellectual property? WIPO Publication No.450E. https://www.wipo.int/edocs/pubdocs/en/wipo_pub_450_2020.pdf