The G7's anti-tariff move with the global minimum tax

The G7 summit has opened a new page in the discussion on the taxation of large multinationals, with an agreement that partially excludes US companies from the global tax mechanism. The agreement, promoted by the Canadian presidency, comes to avoid direct clashes with the Trump administration , which had threatened a “revenge tax” against countries that continued to tax American Big Tech.

The agreement between the G7 countries, for now, looks more like a temporary truce than a structural revision. To become a rule, this pact will have to pass through the OECD filter and obtain the green light of 147 states.

Among the G7 countries there is also Italy , which has moved with its usual caution : it is trying to defend the regulatory framework developed in 2021 under the coordination of the OECD, but it also aims to preserve exports and its industrial apparatus from retaliatory measures.

This agreement undoubtedly demonstrates that Trump's threats have taken hold. Accepting the so-called "parallel solution" has given Italy a breath of fresh air, useful for avoiding immediate ruptures with Washington. But the price to pay is a certain ambiguity : the agreement saves face for everyone, at least for now, but on the fiscal and diplomatic level the situation is less clear.

Global tax, the “preferential route” for the United States

The document presented in Canada speaks of a “parallel solution” motivated by the need to respect the fiscal decision-making capacity of each country . American companies will be excluded from some components of the new system, by virtue of the taxes already paid in their national territory. A measure that falls within the framework of the requests expressed by Donald Trump . The agreement could compromise the original objective of the minimum tax, that is, to limit the artificial transfer of profits by the web giants.

Designed to put an end to the game of fictitious headquarters, the 15% global tax aims to hit the profits of large international groups where they are actually generated. It has been welcomed as the solution against the tax nomadism of big tech, which for years have parked profits in the usual legal havens of Europe. Obviously, that promise of fairness already seems to be creaking.

Tariffs, cross-pressures and political compromises

In the ongoing discussions, the United States would have proposed to safeguard companies already taxed at home, thus avoiding double taxation. In exchange, the infamous “revenge tax” included in the Obbba package was stopped : a punitive tax that would have hit with a 20% rate the income coming from countries not aligned with the American line. The regulatory draft, currently under discussion in the US Senate, provided for a system of tax cuts and reliefs of 2.7 trillion dollars, seasoned with a punitive tax for countries deemed too exuberant on the digital tax front. The text, for now, has been taken off the table.

On the Italian front, Antonio Tajani declared that a 10% duty on European exports would be bearable all things considered (the same thing that Meloni also said at the NATO summit ).

But the numbers tell a different story: according to Bankitalia and the Parliamentary Budget Office, sectors such as pharmaceuticals, automobiles, mechanics and textiles would risk paying the highest price. A trade war, even if only low intensity, would end up damaging Europe more than it could weaken the American economy.

Giorgetti: Agreement useful to avoid clashes with Washington

Economy Minister Giancarlo Giorgetti defined the agreement as an “honourable compromise” , useful to avoid the automatic retaliation mechanism contained in the infamous section 899 of the Obbba.

If the G7 compromise has the merit of freezing, at least for now, the “revenge tax” project, several variables remain in play. The ball is now in the OECD’s court, where the text will have to obtain the approval of 147 countries before being approved .

Meanwhile, Donald Trump is waving the agreement as a success worth one hundred billion dollars, that is, the revenue that his companies would have risked losing with a widespread application of the minimum tax. And he did not miss the opportunity to launch another dig at Europe, accused of relentlessly targeting his companies. “With the digital tax, the EU will not come out of it well, like Canada,” he said.

What would change for Italy?

With this preliminary agreement, in the short term, we avoid trouble first and foremost. No tax revenge from the US, no sudden duties on fashion, food, mechanics and the like. But we give up a mechanism designed to make large multinationals pay where they do business, including Italy. Our web tax remains in place, but it is not excluded that there may be changes. And the principle of the minimum tax, which was supposed to guarantee a minimum of global equity, is in fact weakened.