沒人會把印度當成避稅天堂

No one likes to see a tax demand dropping on to the mat, but in India it comes with a special sense of dread. Foreign businesses such as Vodafone and Cairn Energy know the agonies that come with protracted battles with the country’s revenue service. Now it seems global fund managers might be next.

沒有人喜歡看到催稅單突然飄落在自家地毯上，但是在印度這種情形會引發一種特殊的恐懼感。沃達豐(Vodafone)和凱恩能源(Cairn Energy)等外國企業深知與印度稅收部門進行擴日持久鬥爭的痛苦。如今，全球基金管理公司似乎成了下一個靶子。

Until a few months back, only a handful of tax nerds had heard of India’s minimum alternative tax (MAT), a levy that ensures domestic businesses must hand over a basic portion of profits. That was until some bright spark found a regulatory ruling from 2012, implying that foreign institutional investors might suddenly be liable, despite never having had to pay it before.

一直到幾個月前，只有屈指可數的幾個稅收“怪才”聽過說印度的替代性最低稅(Minimum Alternative Tax，MAT)，該稅意在確保國內公司必須繳納一部分基本利潤。然後有個“聰明鬼”發現了2012年的一項監管裁決——這意味着外國機構投資者或許突然間也有了納稅義務，儘管他們以前從未被徵收過該稅。

Over recent weeks demands have begun arriving at about 100 international funds. Many more of the 6,000 that invest in India could now be hit. Tax experts are peeved, arguing no other country charges foreign equity investors this sort of tax. Fund managers, needless to say, are not best pleased either.

最近幾周內，催稅單開始抵達約100家國際基金管理公司。在印度投資的6000家基金管理公司中的更多公司現在可能中槍。稅務專家十分氣惱，提出沒有哪個國家會向外國股票投資人徵收這種稅。毋庸諱言，基金管理公司的心情也好不到哪去。

“I think people are, for understandable reasons, a little leery of India, given all the tax issues with the Cairns and the Vodafones of this world,” says Hugh Young, the avuncular head of Aberdeen Asset Management in Asia, which this week became the first big fund to admit it had received one of the demands.

“考慮到凱恩和沃達豐之類的公司在印度遭遇的所有稅務問題，我覺得人們出於可以理解的原因，對印度有點警覺，”安本資產管理公司(Aberdeen Asset Management)亞洲地區負責人、慈祥大叔楊修(Hugh Young)稱。本週，該公司成了第一家承認收到此類催稅單的大型基金管理公司。

Oddly, India’s government is frustrated too. Prime minister Narendra Modi has promised to end his country’s record of “tax terrorism”. In that spirit, his government recently changed the law, to ensure that MAT would not apply to foreign funds in future. Perversely, this may even have emboldened the tax authorities to re-look at older cases. If the government claims foreigners are now exempt from MAT, their logic goes, they must not have been exempt before.

奇怪的是，印度政府也很受挫。印度總理納倫德拉•莫迪(Narendra Modi)曾經承諾結束該國“稅收恐怖主義”的過往記錄。按照這種精神，他領導的政府最近修改了法律，確保MAT未來不會施加於外國基金。變態的是，這甚至可能讓稅務當局壯膽，鼓勵他們翻查舊案。他們的邏輯是，如果政府宣告外國人現在免徵MAT，那麼他們過去肯定沒有得到豁免。

“Our hands are tied,” says one senior figure in Mr Modi’s government. “We have fixed this issue for the future, but we can’t just intervene randomly. In a democracy, we have to follow legal process. The foreign funds can appeal.”

“我們束手無策，”莫迪政府一名高級人物稱，“我們解決了這件事未來的問題，但是我們不能隨意干預。在民主體制內，我們必須遵從法律程序。外國基金可以上訴。”

This is a fair point, although it doesn’t disguise the fact there will be a terrible stink if hundreds more funds do now get the demands. Yet this episode also reveals a wider conundrum about tax in India. Mr Modi has pledged to bring harmony to revenue collection. Few doubt his sincerity. Yet seemingly with each promise to improve things, a new row emerges that he seems unable to fix.

這個說法很公正，儘管它沒能掩飾住事實——如果還有數百家基金管理公司收到了催稅單，這將釀成一件大丑聞。不過，這段插曲也暴露出印度稅收制度在更普遍意義上的一個謎團。莫迪承諾讓徵稅工作更加協調。沒人懷疑他的真誠。不過，伴隨着每一個改善現狀的承諾，貌似都會冒出他無法解決的新爭執。

Part of this is a rotten inheritance. India’s last government introduced one especially egregious tax change: the so-called “retrospective” amendment, targeting Vodafone and allowing closed tax cases to be reopened. It also gave tax authorities stiff revenue targets, and made foreign companies fair game.

部分麻煩在於他接手的爛攤子。印度上屆政府引入了一個特別過分的稅收修訂：所謂的“溯及既往”(retrospective)修正條款。該條款針對沃達豐，允許對已經結案的稅收案件重審。它也給稅務部門制定了剛性的稅收目標，並使外國公司成了誘人的靶子。

Unwinding this will take time. Meanwhile, taxes still have to be collected from somewhere. India rightly complains that foreign businesses are too ready to complain about paying even reasonable demands. “India is not a tax haven,” Arun Jaitley, finance minister, thundered last week — although there was never much of a chance of anyone mistaking it for one.

逆轉這些政策將需要時間。與此同時，稅金仍然要從某些地方收上來。印度正確地抱怨，外國企業對合理的徵稅也老是怨言不斷。“印度不是避稅天堂，”印度財長阿倫•亞特力(Arun Jaitley)上週大發雷霆——儘管人們從來都不可能搞錯這一點。

Yet Mr Modi’s government has a case to answer too. It has taken some steps foreign investors should welcome, such as deciding against launching appeals in cases involving companies such as Shell. But equally it has often muddled through, ducking forthright action that could have stopped future tax flare ups.

不過，莫迪政府也有需要回答的指責。它已經採取了外國投資者會歡迎的某些舉措，比如禁止對涉及殼牌(Shell)等公司的數宗案件提起上訴。但同時，莫迪政府往往只是敷衍了事，迴避採取到位的行動，一勞永逸地制止未來的稅務糾紛。

On foreign funds, India’s government says MAT will not apply in future, but it is powerless to stop investigations into older cases. Tax experts dispute this, claiming that legal changes or other rulings could make clear that the tax was never meant to apply to foreign funds.

在外國基金管理公司的問題上，印度政府稱MAT未來將不適用，但它無力阻止對舊案重啓調查。稅務專家對此反駁稱，法律修改或其他裁決可以明確該稅種從來不應適用於外國基金。

Mr Modi has made slow progress fixing other structural problems underpinning India’s history of tax disputes. Most obvious was his unwillingness to scrap the retrospective amendment, meaning high profile cases involving Vodafone and others will now drag on for years. But there are other problems too, such as lengthy appeals processes, caused by courts that lack resources to clear backlogs.

莫迪在解決其他結構性問題上進展緩慢，這些問題是造成印度稅務爭端歷史的根源。最明顯之處在於，他不願廢除“溯及既往”修正條款，這意味着涉及沃達豐等公司的令人矚目的案件還將沒完沒了地拖下去。但也有其他問題，比如法院缺少清理積案的資源，導致上訴過程曠日持久。

India’s tax inspection system is highly decentralised too, arguably giving excessive power to individual inspectors. “A tax officer, under Indian law, is supreme. His power cannot be questioned,” says Dinesh Kanabar, a Mumbai-based tax expert. “There is no accountability. Each officer can pass almost any order he wants, no matter how outrageous it is.” Of course, not every tax demand fits this description. But ending those that do would be in everyone’s interest.

印度的稅務稽查體系也高度分散，可以說給予了個別稽查員過多的職權。“根據印度法律，稅務官是至高無上的。他的權力不容置疑，”孟買稅務專家迪內希•卡納巴(Dinesh Kanabar)稱，“不存在責任追究制度。每一個稅務官可以批准幾乎任何他想要的命令，無論有多離譜。”當然，並非每一份催稅單都符合這種描述。但是制止那些符合這種描述的催稅單符合各方的利益。