Comparing US Corporate Tax Rates to 30 OECD Countries (2008)
OECD stands for the international Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, an organization of thirty (30) countries that accept the principles of representative democracy and free-market economy. (Wikipedia)
| OECD Overall Rank | Country/State | Federal Rate Adjusted | Top State Corporate Tax Rate | Combined Federal and State Rate (Adjusted) (a) | US Rank |
| Iowa | 35 | 12 | 41.6 | 1 | |
| Pennsylvania | 35 | 9.99 | 41.5 | 2 | |
| Minnesota | 35 | 9.8 | 41.4 | 3 | |
| Massachusetts | 35 | 9.5 | 41.2 | 4 | |
| Alaska | 35 | 9.4 | 41.1 | 5 | |
| New Jersey | 35 | 9.36 | 41.1 | 6 | |
| Rhode Island | 35 | 9 | 40.9 | 7 | |
| West Virginia | 35 | 9 | 40.9 | 8 | |
| Maine | 35 | 8.93 | 40.8 | 9 | |
| Vermont | 35 | 8.9 | 40.8 | 10 | |
| California | 35 | 8.84 | 40.7 | 11 | |
| Delaware | 35 | 8.7 | 40.7 | 12 | |
| Indiana | 35 | 8.5 | 40.5 | 13 | |
| New Hampshire | 35 | 8.5 | 40.5 | 14 | |
| Wisconsin | 35 | 7.9 | 40.1 | 15 | |
| Nebraska | 35 | 7.81 | 40.1 | 16 | |
| Idaho | 35 | 7.6 | 39.9 | 17 | |
| New Mexico | 35 | 7.6 | 39.9 | 18 | |
| Connecticut | 35 | 7.5 | 39.9 | 19 | |
| New York | 35 | 7.5 | 39.9 | 20 | |
| Kansas | 35 | 7.35 | 39.8 | 21 | |
| Illinois | 35 | 7.3 | 39.7 | 22 | |
| Maryland | 35 | 7 | 39.6 | 23 | |
| North Dakota | 35 | 7 | 39.6 | 24 | |
| 1 | Japan | 30 | 11.56 | 39.54 | |
| Arizona | 35 | 6.968 | 39.5 | 25 | |
| North Carolina | 35 | 6.9 | 39.5 | 26 | |
| Montana | 35 | 6.75 | 39.4 | 27 | |
| Oregon | 35 | 6.6 | 39.3 | 28 | |
| 2 | United States | 35 | 6.57 | 39.27 | |
| Arkansas | 35 | 6.5 | 39.2 | 29 | |
| Tennessee | 35 | 6.5 | 39.2 | 30 | |
| Washington * | 35 | 6.4 | 39.2 | 31 | |
| Hawaii | 35 | 6.4 | 39.2 | 32 | |
| 3 | Germany | 26.38 | 17 | 38.9 | |
| Michigan * | 35 | 6 | 38.9 | 33 | |
| Georgia | 35 | 6 | 38.9 | 34 | |
| Kentucky | 35 | 6 | 38.9 | 35 | |
| Oklahoma | 35 | 6 | 38.9 | 36 | |
| Virginia | 35 | 6 | 38.9 | 37 | |
| Florida | 35 | 5.5 | 38.6 | 38 | |
| Louisiana | 35 | 8 | 38.5 | 39 | |
| Missouri | 35 | 6.25 | 38.4 | 40 | |
| Ohio | 35 | 5.1 | 38.3 | 41 | |
| Mississippi | 35 | 5 | 38.3 | 42 | |
| South Carolina | 35 | 5 | 38.3 | 43 | |
| Utah | 35 | 5 | 38.3 | 44 | |
| Colorado | 35 | 4.63 | 38 | 45 | |
| Alabama | 35 | 6.5 | 37.8 | 46 | |
| 4 | Canada | 22.1 | 14 | 36.1 | |
| Texas * | 35 | 1.6 | 36.0 | 47 | |
| Nevada | 35 | 0 | 35.0 | 48 | |
| South Dakota | 35 | 0 | 35.0 | 49 | |
| Wyoming | 35 | 0 | 35.0 | 50 | |
| 5 | France | 34.43 | 0 | 34.4 | |
| 6 | Belgium | 33.99 | 0 | 33.99 | |
| 7 | Italy | 33 | 0 | 33 | |
| 8 | New Zealand | 33 | 0 | 33 | |
| 9 | Spain | 32.5 | 0 | 32.5 | |
| 10 | Luxembourg | 22.88 | 7.5 | 30.38 | |
| 11 | Australia | 30 | 0 | 30 | |
| 12 | United Kingdom | 30 | 0 | 30 | |
| 13 | Mexico | 28 | 0 | 28 | |
| 14 | Norway | 28 | 0 | 28 | |
| 15 | Sweden | 28 | 0 | 28 | |
| 16 | South Korea ** | 25 | 2.5 | 27.5 | |
| 17 | Portugal | 25 | 1.5 | 26.5 | |
| 18 | Finland | 26 | 0 | 26 | |
| 19 | Netherlands | 25.5 | 0 | 25.5 | |
| 20 | Austria | 25 | 0 | 25 | |
| 21 | Denmark | 25 | 0 | 25 | |
| 22 | Greece | 25 | 0 | 25 | |
| 23 | Czech Republic | 24 | 0 | 24 | |
| 24 | Switzerland | 8.50 | 14.64 | 21.32 | |
| 25 | Hungary | 20 | 0 | 20 | |
| 26 | Turkey | 20 | 0 | 20 | |
| 27 | Poland | 19 | 0 | 19 | |
| 28 | Slovak Republic | 19 | 0 | 19 | |
| 29 | Iceland | 18 | 0 | 18 | |
| 30 | Ireland | 12.5 | 0 | 12.5 | |
| OECD Overall Rank | Country/State | Federal Rate Adjusted | Top State Corporate Tax Rate | Combined Federal and State Rate (Adjusted) (a) | US Rank |
| *Michigan, Texas and Washington have gross receipts taxes rather than traditional corporate income taxes. For comparison purposes, we converted the gross receipts taxes into an effective CIT rate. See Tax Foundation Notes (link below) for methodology. | |||||
| ** On June 3, 2008, South Korea’s Ministry of Strategy and Finance announced that it will cut the maximum corporate tax rate from 25% to 22% to stimulate economic growth. (Source: Xinhua) | |||||
| (a) Combined rate adjusted for federal deduction of state taxes paid | |||||
Data compiled from: http://www.taxfoundation.org/publications/show/22917.html
Source: OECD, http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/26/56/33717459.xls
Wow!
I am surprised. After constantly telling the Europeans the US is the place to do business and to enjoy freedom, I feel like I’ve just stepped in it.
And this is before the Obama tax hike?
And then there’s cap and trade for energy use that will be piled on top of that?
Hello mass unemployment!
This chart is a bit misleading for Canada, because there are two rates:
1. Small businesses (less than $250,000 in revenue).
2. All other businesses.
The small business rate is significantly lower. In addition, each province has a different income tax rate.
In British Columbia, for example, the combined rate for small business is well under 20%.
Thanks for the additional detail “rhg.” Your information makes Canada look even better. The OCED data was averaged across all the various businesses and corporations for each country, so the lower rates for some regions and for lower income levels makes sense.
I have a question. Someone told me that US Corps have many writeoffs/loopholes so American corporations do not pay at highest rate ( or second according to your chart) Is there any truth to this?
LBB, Companies are allowed to deduct their business expenses (write-offs) from their gross revenues to determine their real earnings. That’s how every corporation, business, sole-proprietorship, and self-employed individual determines what net earnings they have earned. It would make no sense to tax them on their gross revenues.
Often, for quite a few businesses (especially start-ups, mismanaged companies, or during bad economic times) in certain years, their expenses equal or exceed gross revenues. In those years, their real earnings are zero or below zero, therefore they do not pay any corporate tax, and they shouldn’t because they did not earn anything. It would be vastly unethical and illogical for them to pay taxes on zero real income.