The Washington Post

30 years of companies abandoning the U.S. for lower taxes, in one chart

The number of U.S. companies reincorporating overseas has shot up considerably in recent decades.

Nearly twice as many companies (47 in all) have shifted their corporate tax paying duties abroad since 2003, or almost double the amount that did in the twenty years prior, according to data from Congressional Research Service (CRS). And the acceleration is only slated to continue: At least another 12 are currently planning to do the same, according to CRS.

Why all the reincorporation, or tax inversion, as the practice is often known? Corporate tax breaks.

There are a number of advantages inherent in reincorporating, including the likelihood of more fluid overseas acquisitions and lower borrowing rates due to increased cash piles. But when a company reincorporates, what it's really doing is shifting its corporate citizenship; and when a company shifts its corporate citizenship, what it's really doing is trying to pay less in taxes. America's dreaded 35 percent corporate tax rate, as we've noted before, is plenty higher than that of, say, the U.K., which hovers closer to 20 percent.

Since reincorporating outside of the U.S. is not only perfectly legal but also likely to prove fairly lucrative, it's hard to blame any company capable of making the move for at least trying to do so. It has, after all, resulted in the stockpiling of some $1 trillion (paywall) in cash, which is now believed to be sitting overseas as a result of such maneuvers.

But while the act of reincorporating abroad affords a company quite a few advantages, it also poses its fair share of problems. Most immediately, it means less money contributed to U.S. public coffers, but cash accumulated abroad also often ends up sitting dormant, since reincorporated companies can neither invest in new projects in the U.S. nor return any of that extra dough to their shareholders. The practice has earned good deal of public scrutiny, too. Pharmaceutical giant Pfizer saw plenty of public and political backlash during its recent attempt to reincorporate overseas, and Walgreen's, which is currently considering reincorporation, could face the risk of contradicting the "quintessentially American brand" that it has built.

Roberto A. Ferdman is a reporter for Wonkblog covering food, economics, immigration and other things. He was previously a staff writer at Quartz.



Success! Check your inbox for details. You might also like:

Please enter a valid email address

See all newsletters

Show Comments
Most Read



Success! Check your inbox for details.

See all newsletters

Your Three. Videos curated for you.
Play Videos
From clubfoot to climbing: Double amputee lives life of adventure
Learn to make traditional soup dumplings
In defense of dads
Play Videos
How to make head cheese
Perks of private flying
The rise and fall of baseball cards
Play Videos
Husband finds love, loss in baseball
New hurdles for a Maryland tradition
How to survive a shark attack
Play Videos
Portland's most important meal of the day
What you need to know about Legionnaires' disease
How to save and spend money at college
Next Story
Lydia DePillis · July 8, 2014

To keep reading, please enter your email address.

You’ll also receive from The Washington Post:
  • A free 6-week digital subscription
  • Our daily newsletter in your inbox

Please enter a valid email address

I have read and agree to the Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.

Please indicate agreement.

Thank you.

Check your inbox. We’ve sent an email explaining how to set up an account and activate your free digital subscription.